• Print
• Share

Special Research Report No. 5: Peacebuilding Commission

Introduction • Background • Key Developments and Activities in its Second Year • Expected Action • Analysis of PBC Outcomes • Looking Ahead • UN Documents • Useful Additional Resources

Report in PDF Format

Introduction
This Special Research Report analyses the activities of the UN Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) during its second year of operation and provides a follow-up to our Special Research Reports of 23 June 2006 which reviewed the lead-up to and establishment of the PBC and of 5 October 2007 reviewing its first year of work.

Whereas the first year was largely spent on organisational issues, the second year of the PBC was primarily devoted to the country-specific issues of Burundi, Guinea-Bissau, Sierra Leone and, to a lesser extent, the Central African Republic (the CAR was added to the agenda of the Commission towards the end of its second session) as well as some organisational matters. The Commission’s report on the second year of its activities and outcomes was submitted to both the Security Council and the General Assembly on 24 June.

The PBC achieved important substantive objectives during its second year, alleviating some of the initial concerns about the Commission which at the outset had been marked by a degree of pessimism. By mid-2008 there was a perception of cautious optimism. The PBC’s accomplishments in its second session included:

1. agreement on including Guinea-Bissau on its agenda;
2. adding the CAR to the PBC’s agenda—bringing the number of countries covered to four;
3. adopting the monitoring and tracking mechanism for peacebuilding in Burundi (PBC/2/BDI/4);
4. adopting the Sierra Leone Peacebuilding Cooperation Framework (PBC/2/SLE/1);
5. adopting the recommendations of the first biannual review of the implementation of the Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Burundi (PBC/2/BDI/9);
6. adopting the recommendations of the first biannual review of the implementation of the Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding for Sierra Leone (PBC/2/SLE/8); and
7. adopting the PBC’s second annual report (A/63/92–S/2008/417).

Members seemed pleased with these measures, particularly in terms of settling the necessary collaborative frameworks for enhancing peacebuilding. However, they also seem conscious that successes cannot be declared without concrete results on the ground.

top

Background
The PBC was established on 20 December 2005 by concurrent resolutions of the Security Council (S/RES/1645) and General Assembly (A/RES/60/180) as an intergovernmental advisory body with an Organisational Committee of 31 member countries. The Commission held its first official meeting on 23 June 2006 in New York.

Under the founding resolutions, a country can be included on the Commission’s agenda by a request from the Security Council or the Secretary-General or in “exceptional cases where the country is on the verge of lapsing or relapsing into conflict” by a request from the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), the General Assembly or the country itself.

On 21 June 2006, the Security Council decided to request that the PBC provide advice on the situation in Burundi and Sierra Leone (PBC/OC/1/2). Both countries had already expressed a desire to be included in the PBC agenda. In response to that request, Burundi and Sierra Leone were formally placed on the agenda of the Commission at the Organisational Committee’s second meeting on 13 July 2006 (PBC/1/OC/SR.2).

On 11 December 2007 the Security Council requested that the PBC take up the situation in Guinea-Bissau (the country’s then Prime Minister Martinho N’Dafa Cabi supported his country being placed on the Commission’s agenda). The Commission admitted Guinea-Bissau onto its agenda on 19 December 2007.

The Central African Republic became the fourth country to be added to the PBC agenda on 12 June 2008, following a referral of the country by the Security Council to the Commission. (The Council’s action had been undertaken in response to a letter from the foreign minister of the CAR to the chair of the PBC in March requesting that the country be placed on the Commission’s agenda, which had been forwarded to the Council on 10 May.)

The PBC has established a “country-specific committee” for each of these four countries, comprising the 31 PBC Organisational Committee members plus the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF)—both of which are also referred to as International Financial Institutes or IFIs by the PBC—the UN country team, relevant neighbouring countries, and other countries and regional and international organisations with an interest PBC agenda countries. These country-specific configurations have adopted a practical hands-on approach, held numerous meetings and travelled to each of the four countries.

On the Secretariat side, the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) and the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) were also established through the same December 2005 Security Council-General Assembly resolutions. The PBSO has three functions:

• to support the Commission;
• manage the PBF; and
• assist the Secretary-General to bring together the peacebuilding actors in the UN system.

The Fund is not formally linked to the Commission but the PBC has requested the Secretary-General to allocate funds to countries on its agenda, as it did with Burundi and Sierra Leone.

Resolutions 1645 and A/60/180 established three main functions for the PBC, as follows:

• bring together all relevant actors to marshal resources and to advise on and propose integrated strategies for post-conflict peacebuilding and recovery;
• focus attention on the reconstruction and institution building efforts necessary for recovery from conflict and to support the development of integrated strategies in order to lay the foundation for sustainable development; and
• provide recommendations and information to improve the coordination of all relevant actors within and outside the United Nations, to develop best practices, to help to ensure predictable financing for early recovery activities and to extend the period of attention given by the international community to post-conflict recovery.

In practice these have resulted in identification of the following main tasks:

• helping improve the coordination of all relevant actors;
• focusing attention on priority reconstruction and institution building efforts;
• advising on and building support for the integrated strategies;
• providing recommendations to develop best practices;
• assisting in ensuring predictable financing;
• prolonging the period of attention given by the international community beyond the initial post-conflict phase; and
• bringing together all relevant actors to generate requisite peacebuilding resources.

The Commission’s Organisational Committee consists of:

• seven members from the Security Council (the P5 plus two elected members);
• seven from ECOSOC;
• five top providers of assessed contributions to UN budgets and of voluntary contributions to UN funds, programmes and agencies, excluding committee members already selected from the Security Council and ECOSOC;
• five top providers of military personnel and police to UN missions, excluding committee members already selected from the Security Council and ECOSOC or selected based on assessed and voluntary contributions to the UN; and
• seven members determined by the General Assembly with consideration given to equitable regional distribution and post-conflict experience.

Membership in the PBC Organisational Committee is for a term of two years and it is renewable. As a result of the way the Security Council decided on its representation, the five permanent members of the Security Council in effect have permanently assigned seats.

top

Key Developments and Activities in its Second Year
At the concluding meeting of its first session on 27 June 2007 the Organisational Committee elected Ambassador Kenzo Oshima of Japan as its chairperson. In his inaugural address, he cited several priority issues and called for shifting the focus of the PBC programme of work from the largely organisational preoccupations of the first year towards a much more substantive focus on acting to fulfill the peacebuilding needs of countries on its agenda. His proposed priorities for the PBC’s second year of work were:

• tangible results for meeting the requirements of the countries under consideration (the country-specific approach was deemed to be central in that regard, including development of integrated strategic frameworks for Burundi and Sierra Leone);
• streamlined working methods and reduced workload in the PBC and the PBSO;
• consideration of additional countries for the PBC agenda;
• establishing the PBC as a focal point for information on best practices for peacebuilding and as a forum for dissemination of “political messages” (e.g. through issuance of formal statements like Conclusions and Recommendations on country specific issues) to the international community, by strengthening its relationship with the IFIs, UN funds and programmes, civil society, and the academic and research community;
• taking up thematic issues common to post-conflict countries (particularly youth unemployment, rule of law, and security sector reform) with wide participation of different stakeholders; and
• close cooperation with the rest of the UN system, particularly by strengthening the PBC’s interaction with the Security Council, the General Assembly, ECOSOC, and the Secretary-General.

Ambassador Yukio Takasu was subsequently elected by the Commission as its chairperson on 12 September 2007. Under his leadership these initially identified priorities have continued.

During its second session (from 23 June 2007 to 22 June 2008), the PBC not only held numerous Organisational Committee and country-specific configuration meetings but also organised missions to countries on its agenda. The Commission held 84 meetings as follows:

• the Organisational Committee held eight formal and 13 informal meetings;
• the Burundi country-specific configuration met in four formal and 18 informal meetings;
• the Guinea-Bissau configuration convened two formal and 13 informal meetings;
• the Sierra Leone configuration held three formal and 15 informal meetings; and
• the Lessons Learned Group convened three formal meetings and five informal meetings.

The Commission continued to receive high-level briefings (usually by heads of relevant international organisations or bodies) on aspects of peacebuilding during its second session, including being addressed in both formal and informal settings on the role of peacebuilding in Africa. Instances included:

• on 19 June 2008, Joaquim Chissano, Chairperson of the Forum of African Former Heads of State and Government briefed the Organisational Committee on “Peacebuilding towards the construction of capable States in Africa”; and
• on 17 April 2008 the Commission was briefed informally by the Chairperson of the African Union Peace and Security Council, Saherwork Zawdy.

The PBC adopted its annual report on 23 June and forwarded copies of it to the presidents of the General Assembly and Security Council on 24 June.

Organisational Committee Elections
The Organisational Committee elections have presented unexpected difficulties, in part due to the high degree of interest in and competition for election between member states.

The election of representatives from ECOSOC (originally expected in April) has proved particularly problematic. There has been protracted disagreement about which region should occupy the remaining two seats after the initial distribution of one seat each to the five UN regional groupings. This disagreement in turn has also stalled action on electing the representatives of the General Assembly to serve on the Committee. (The General Assembly’s selection of members in part depends on the results emerging from the selection process in ECOSOC to ensure equitable geographical representation in the Commission.) Consequently, on 11 July the tenure of the Japanese chair of the PBC Organisational Committee, Ambassador Yukio Takasu, as well as the those of the vice-chairs, Ambassadors Carmen Gallardo Hernández of El Salvador and Leslie Kojo Christian of Ghana, which were due to expire at the end of the second session of the Commission on 22 June, were extended until 31 December.

Since the PBC’s inception the African and Asian Groups have each occupied one of the extra two seats remaining from the initial regional distribution of seats for representatives of ECOSOC to the PBC. However, the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC) has insisted this year that it should be given one of the extra seats to allow two of its members (Brazil and El Salvador) to be elected from ECOSOC. (Chile, another GRULAC member, is reportedly pursuing a candidacy as part of the General Assembly quota.) But the African Group has insisted on retaining two seats from the ECOSOC quota while the Asian group wants to ensure that at least eight of its members will be represented on the PBC at any time, including through ECOSOC elections.

Initially, on 20 June the General Assembly and ECOSOC agreed on a three-week extension for their respective members currently serving on the Organisational Committee in a bid to buy some time to resolve the issue. This proved to be insufficient and on 11 July ECOSOC and the General Assembly extended the terms of their respective PBC representatives until 31 December to allow for further negotiations among regional groups on the election. Arrangements to commence negotiations were underway at press time, with a decision expected to be reached by mid-December. (In January, it will also be time for the Security Council to choose two members from elected Council members since the current members in this category—Belgium and South Africa—are stepping down in December.)

In contrast, agreement was reached among the top UN financial contributors (based on a list published by the Secretary-General) for a rotation of seats within their category by having Canada and Sweden replace Norway and Italy for two of the five seats assigned, The other remaining top financial contributors currently serving are Japan, Germany and the Netherlands. While Norway’s actual financial contributions continued to surpass those of Sweden and Canada, an understanding reached among the top ten financial contributors allowed for periodic rotation of their representatives without resort to a selection criterion based solely on the statistical top five contributors.

Another concern about equitable representation on the PBC Organisational Committee has been the attempt by other regional groups to redress the large overall representation from the Western European and Others Group (WEOG)—nine (29 percent) out of the total 31 members, with four top financial contributors (Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden) and four from the current Security Council (Belgium, France, the UK and the US) and one from ECOSOC (Luxembourg). WEOG, which has no representatives from either the troop-contributing countries (TCCs) or the General Assembly categories, has reportedly expressed its willingness to give up a seat from the Security Council quota (the one that Belgium presently occupies). It remains to be seen whether this will provide a possible solution.

On 13 July TCCs circulated a letter conveying their decision to accept the understanding reached in ECOSOC and the General Assembly to keep their representatives on the Commission until 31 December and similarly indicated their decision to retain their representatives from the previous session of the PBC until the end of the calendar year. The TCCs had on 4 April sent a letter (A/62/795) to the president of the General Assembly informing him of their decision to select Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, Nepal and Nigeria for a two year term commencing on 23 June 2008—thus Nepal was the new country slated to replace Ghana in this category of countries.

A notable related issue has been the TCCs’ preference to strictly follow a selection criterion based solely on its representatives being its top five eligible troop contributors. (There has been strong resistance, especially from the leading Asian troop contributors, to fashioning an understanding for rotation of seats among the top ten contributors along the lines adopted by the top financial contributors.) However, Jordan, which was listed among the top five UN troop contributors this year, gave up its seat to Nigeria, which ranked eighth, through a bilateral arrangement and subsequent agreement by the TCCs. This has raised questions about its precedent-setting nature, including the eligibility of countries that were skipped over in terms of the rankings on the list of contributors to arrive at this agreement. (The founding resolutions provide that representatives in this category should be “five top providers of military personnel and civilian police to United Nations missions…selected by and among the ten top providers“. This understanding was reportedly arrived at, without prescribing specific details of the eligibility criteria in the lead-up to the adoption of the said resolutions, to allow for appropriate arrangement[s] to be made by the top ten contributors for selecting their five representatives.)

(For more background details on the PBC Organisational Committee elections please see our 5 June 2008 Update.)

Country Focus
PBC engagement in the country-specific issues on its agenda has focused primarily on drawing up, facilitating implementation and monitoring of Integrated Peacebuilding Strategies or IPBS (i.e. strategies emanating from genuine collaboration between international and national actors, under the aegis of the PBC) for the respective countries on the Commission’s agenda. Key to the developments of these strategies has been the identification of the peacebuilding challenges and priorities for each of the countries being considered by the PBC.

Burundi 

The Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Burundi (PBC/2/BDI/4) adopted during the Commission’s first session sets out eight peacebuilding priority areas as follows:

• promotion of good governance;
• implementation of the Comprehensive Ceasefire Agreement between the government of Burundi and rebel Palipehutu-Forces nationales de liberation;
• reforming the security sector;
• justice, promotion of human rights and action to combat impunity;
• resolving the land issue (i.e. its efficient use and issues of land ownership) and socio-economic recovery;
• mobilisation and coordination of international assistance;
• the subregional dimension to peacebuilding; and
• the gender dimension.

The Commission, together with the government of Burundi, as well as other stakeholders such as civil society and members of the donor community, focused on developing a monitoring and tracking mechanism for the IPBS during the PBC’s second year of work. It also continued to closely monitor peacebuilding in the country.

On 5 December 2007 the Commission adopted a joint monitoring and tracking mechanism for the strategic framework which set out the criteria or “benchmarks and indicators” that the Burundian government and its partners will use to evaluate progress in peace consolidation in the country.

On 6 February 2008, the Burundi configuration agreed on an annual work plan, focusing on two sets of activities:

• fulfilling the requirements reflected in the strategic framework and in the monitoring and tracking mechanism for the integrated strategic framework for peacebuilding in Burundi, in the lead-up to holding the first related review in June; and
• monitoring the peacebuilding process and providing advice to relevant stakeholders.

An informal thematic meeting of the Burundi configuration on sustainable solutions to land issues was held on 27 May 2008. The return of refugees from Tanzania and the anticipated implications for additional resource needs were identified as key issues.

On 23 June the first biannual review of the progress and challenges to the Burundi strategic framework was held by the PBC. A particular focus was on the progress with fostering dialogue between various national actors. Members were also encouraged by the fact that a draft bill submitted by the Government to revise the nation’s criminal code was adopted by its national assembly. It was anticipated that this would provide a stronger basis for dealing with gender-based violent crimes and corruption. Similarly, a ceasefire agreement was concluded between the government and the Palipehutu-FNL in June, was seen as offering fresh hopes of peace consolidation. Such successes are seen, at least in part, as a product of the PBC’s galvanising efforts which bring together the government, political parties, local civil society and international partners and commit them to fulfill the objectives set out in the integrated strategic framework that they all agreed to through extensive consultations.

Challenges continue however in the areas of reforming the security and justice sectors; resolving land issues; and ensuring the political integration of Palipehutu-FNL and the disarming of ex-combatants.

Recommendations of the review were adopted by the Commission (PBC/2/BDI/9).

On 17 July the Organisational Committee elected Sweden tosucceed Norway as chair of the Burundi country specific configuration. Sweden had joined the PBC in June as a financial contributor, when Norway rotated off the Commission.

Central African Republic 

On 12 June the Organisational Committee of the PBC placed the Central African Republic on the Commission’s agenda due to multiple governance, security and development challenges facing the CAR, including an urgent need for revitalisation of conflict-affected communities, security sector reform, the promotion of good governance and rule of law. Belgium was elected as the chair of the country-specific configuration that was set up for the CAR. Belgian Ambassador Jan Grauls subsequently undertook an exploratory visit the country from in July to acquaint himself with the national authorities and to explain the work of the PBC, identify the country’s peacebuilding priorities and to meet with representatives of civil society and international organisations.

Guinea-Bissau 

Following the inclusion of Guinea-Bissau on the PBC’s agenda on 19 December 2007 Ambassador Maria Luiza R. Viotti of Brazil became Chair of the Guinea-Bissau configuration. Since then the configuration members have given priority to drawing up a strategic framework. Viotti visited Guinea-Bissau in January and April to the identify peacebuilding priorities and challenges facing the country. Areas covered that were identified included:

• reform of public administration;
• consolidation of the rule of law and security sector reform;
• combating drug trafficking and organised crime;
• promotion of professional technical training and youth employment;
• addressing the needs of vulnerable groups;
• rehabilitation of infrastructure, in particular the energy sector; and
• reactivation of the economy.

The Commission approved the draft strategic framework on 31 July 2008 subject to a final review by the Government of Guinea-Bissau. Following a change of government in the country in early August, the chair of the Guinea-Bissau configuration undertook a further visit to the country from 10 to 12 September to discuss developments in the country, the prospects for the Commission’s continued engagement and the timing for the final adoption of the strategic framework for Peacebuilding.

On 23 September the Commission adopted conclusions and recommendations arising from the visit (PBC/3/GNB/1). These included the conclusion that the political situation in the country had stabilised following the establishment of a new government on 5 August and that the government supported continued engagement with the PBC and was comfortable with the formal adoption of the country’s integrated peacebuilding framework.

On 1 October the Commission proceeded to finally adopt the strategic framework for peacebuilding in Guinea-Bissau (this took into account final input from the Government of Guinea-Bissau). This framework highlighted peacebuilding priorities such as strengthening law enforcement, reforming the security sector, wealth generation and modernising the country’s public administration system.

Sierra Leone 

During its first year, the Commission had compiled priorities for Sierra Leone including capacity building, good governance, justice and security sector reform; and youth unemployment. In late 2007 the Government of Sierra Leone raised the energy sector as a vital element in tackling the other peacebuilding tasks. The Commission therefore added energy to those earlier identified peacebuilding priority areas for the country.

In 2007 meetings were held by the Sierra Leone configuration to garner support for national elections and the energy sector emergency plan. The new Sierra Leonean government came into power following the september 2007 elections and the Commission subsequently resumed its discussions on an integrated peacebuilding strategy for the country with the new government which added energy as a priority issue.

On 12 December 2007, the Peacebuilding Commission and the Government of Sierra Leone adopted a Peacebuilding Cooperation Framework (PBC/2/SLE/1) which established the priority areas for post-conflict development including democracy and good governance, youth employment and empowerment, justice and security sector reform, capacity building and public administration and energy sector development.

Following the adoption of the framework, the Commission adopted a semi-annual work plan which highlighted the following objectives:

• generating support for the implementation of the commitments contained in the framework;
• broadening of the donor base in Sierra Leone; and
• triggering new activities or expanding existing activities in peacebuilding priority areas.

On 19 June the PBC held its first biannual review of the implementation of the Sierra Leone Peacebuilding Cooperation Framework, which noted the progress that had been made in the implementation of a number of commitments in the peacebuilding framework, including in the areas of justice and security sector reform, anti-corruption efforts, energy sector development and preparations for local elections. It noted, however, that extra efforts were required in areas related to national reconciliation. It also pointed to the fragility of the country’s overall economic situation, youth employment and empowerment and capacity-building. The review resulted in the adoption of recommendations (PBC/2/SLE/8) highlighting intensified action that should be taken to address the peacebuilding priorities for Sierra Leone, the UN and international partners, and outlined the role of Commission itself in the implementation of the framework’s priority areas.

Field Missions
The PBC undertook a number of trips to the countries on its agenda to directly acquaint itself with the situations and challenges on the ground and to interact with the key local actors.

The Chair of the Guinea-Bissau configuration, Brazilian Ambassador Viotti, undertook an exploratory mission to Bissau from 23 to 25 January 2008, to gather first-hand impressions on the situation and to establish contacts on the ground with the government and other stakeholders like political party leaders, local civil society (including NGOs and the private sector), international agencies on the ground and the diplomatic community. The Guinea-Bissau configuration visited the country from 6 to 11 April with the objective of:

• discussing the major priorities and challenges regarding peacebuilding initiatives being carried out by the government to tackle challenges and the kind of international support the country requires;
• visiting project sites relevant to peacebuilding; and
• discussing PBF activities and setting up the national steering committee (comprising representatives of the UN, the government, international donors and local civil society) tasked with overseeing the selection of projects and allocation of funding.

The Guinea-Bissau country-specific configuration has since discussed the peacebuilding priorities (reform of the security sector, wealth generation and modernisation of public administration) which were factored into the strategic framework for the country which was adopted by the Commission on 1 October.

From 9 to 15 October 2007, the chair of the Sierra Leone configuration, Ambassador Frank Majoor of the Netherlands, visited Sierra Leone to meet with the newly elected government and discuss concrete ways in which the Commission could support the government’s efforts for peace, reconciliation and economic recovery. The chair again visited Sierra Leone from 21 to 25 April 2008 to discuss the status of implementation of the framework and to set the stage for a high-level stakeholders’ consultation and the biannual review of the framework, which were respectively held on 19 May and 19 June 2008. He later led a delegation to Sierra Leone from 1 to 6 June to obtain first-hand information on the progress in the implementation of the framework and to prepare for the 19 June biannual review.

Regarding Burundi, the then chair of that country’s PBC configuration, Norwegian Ambassador and Permanent Representative Johan Løvald, travelled to the country on two occasions during the second session of the PBC. Ambassador Løvald initially went on a fact-finding field mission from 5 to 7 September 2007, to discuss the three main challenges that confronted the country’s peace consolidation efforts. Those issues were:

• a fragile budgetary situation;
• a parliamentary deadlock resulting in the blocking of legislative action; and
• the withdrawal of Palipehutu-FNL from the Joint Verification and Monitoring Mechanism on 21 July 2007.

From 10 to 15 May 2008, a delegation of seven members of the Burundi configuration led by Ambassador Løvald travelled to Burundi on a field mission to obtain first-hand information about the situation on the ground, especially on renewed hostilities between the Palipehutu-FNL and the National Defence Forces of Burundi, following attacks by the Palipehutu-FNL in April 2008 and the stalemate in parliament. The visit also served as an opportunity to review the preparation of the first biannual review of the Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Burundi scheduled to take place on 23 June and to focus the attention of the international community on peacebuilding efforts in the country.

Peacebuilding Support Office
On 7 August, the UN Secretary-General announced the appointment of Jane Holl Lute of the United States as the new Assistant Secretary-General for Peacebuilding Support. Lute assumed her new post at the beginning of September. She succeeded Carolyn McAskie of Canada who had led the PBSO since its creation in 2006 until the end of her assignment on 31 July.

The PBSOhas been able to support the work of the Commission with a number of innovative tools, including a comprehensive mapping of resources and contributions from various stakeholders to the peacebuilding process in Burundi in order to allow the Burundi configuration to better focus its efforts, particularly in the areas of resource mobilisation and coordination of the international community’s support for Burundi. (The mapping served as a key input to the first biannual report on the implementation of the strategic framework.) Similarly, a mapping of resources and gaps for peacebuilding in Guinea-Bissau and an analysis of the situation in Guinea-Bissau (PBC/2/GNB/5) were presented to the country-specific configuration on 13 February and 14 March 2008, respectively, with the objective of contributing to the coordination of efforts by donors and other stakeholders. The latter document was updated in April 2008 and is to function as a “living document” to show additional collaborative initiatives in support of the country.

Peacebuilding Fund
The PBF was launched in October 2006 to help bridge the gap faced by countries between the initial phase of emerging from conflict and later recovery stages. The Fund, which is managed by the PBSO, is not formally connected to the PBC; however the Commission can request the Secretary-General to allocate funds to countries on its agenda and has been quite supportive of the PBC’s work. The PBF does not only assist countries on the agenda of the Commission but also provides support to countries in similar circumstances as designated by the Secretary-General, as well as for individual projects funded under the PBF Emergency Window (a mechanism designed to support urgent peacebuilding needs which is set in motion by a request of the senior UN representative in an eligible country, in accordance with a specific submission process aimed at ensuring a rapid approval by the Secretary-General).

The Fund currently supports projects in all of the four countries on the PBC’s agenda, in addition to seven other countries with urgent peacebuilding needs selected by the Secretary-General for the PBF’s assistance. (On 4 August, the Secretary-General issued his second annual report on the PBF [A/63/218–S/2008/522] which indicated that the total portfolio of the Peacebuilding Fund stood at over $269 million, thus surpassing the original target of $250 million envisaged in its establishment to assist in the effort to generate predictable and sustainable funding for recovery and peacebuilding activity.) In terms of actual disbursements to the countries on the Commission’s agenda, as of May 2008, Burundi and Sierra Leone received $35 million each to support peacebuilding initiatives. In Burundi, $31.9 million had been approved for 17 priority sector projects and in Sierra Leone $32.2 million had been approved for 14 priority sector projects.

Countries that had been considered for possible inclusion on the PBC’s agenda were selected by the Secretary-General to be eligible for PBF support. Thus on 8 January 2008 the Secretary-General announced that the Central African Republic is eligible to receive assistance from the PBF (the CAR has since been included on the Commission’s agenda). Similarly, on 19 June 2008 he declared that Côte d’Ivoire is eligible to receive help from the Fund. (In April a request was made by the Government of Côte d’Ivoire to be placed on the PBC agenda.)

The Commission brought Côte d’Ivoire’s request to the attention of the Security Council for consideration on 25 April and also conveyed the request to the General Assembly and ECOSOC. No action has been taken so far. For now, the Council appears to have adopted a wait-and-see approach to base its eventual decision on political developments in the country, most notably, the elections scheduled to be held in November.

Following the approval of the interim priority plan, the Secretary-General allocated funding of $ 6million from the Peacebuilding Fund to Guinea-Bissau. That initial disbursement, in support of projects concerning the issues of law and order, youth employment and elections, was the first portion of the Fund’s allocation to Guinea-Bissau. A second portion is expected to be allocated after the adoption of the country’s strategic framework. That early allocation of funds was made in line with the Guinea-Bissau configuration’s decision to engage in a two-pronged approach, involving a combination of a strategic planning effort with a focus on short-term deliverables.

Participation of International Organisations
On 19 December 2007, the Organisational Committee agreed on modalities for the participation of the European Community. It will be represented in country-specific configurations by both the presidency of the Council of the European Union and the European Commission, in meetings of the Commission’s country-specific configurations. The representatives of the EU and European Commission will be assigned two seats while sharing one common name-plaque with designation as “European Community”, with one speaker taking the floor. This pragmatic solution was reached to accommodate the participation of the European Commission (which is the generally recognised European institutional donor) and the EU (which generally represents policy positions).

Cooperation with the UN System and International Organisations
The Commission’s relations with key UN organs (the Security Council, the General Assembly and ECOSOC) developed considerably during the second year of the PBC. Regular informal interaction between the PBC chair and those organs has been instituted. Attempts for further interaction on overall policy development, enhancing coherence in collaborative and complementary roles (especially in the areas of good governance, the rule of law, community recovery and security building) were also explored. The result of this has been a less strained year among these bodies, especially in relation to the Security Council. (During the PBC’s the first year, there were loud and persistent calls by a number of member states, especially from the Non-Aligned Movement, criticising the working relations between the key organs in relation to the PBC, especially in reaction to what was perceived as aspirations of the Security Council to acquire control over the Commission’s work.)

Positive initiatives from the Security Council also helped to improve the atmosphere. On several occasions, the Council made requests for advice and briefings from the Commission. It also issued invitations to PBC chairpersons to participate in relevant Council meetings. For instance, on 11 December 2007 the president of the Security Council wrote a letter to the chair of the PBC supporting the request to place Guinea-Bissau on the PBC agenda and invited the Commission to provide advice on the situation in the country (S/2007/744). The PBC admitted Guinea-Bissau into its agenda in that same month and on 25 March 2008 the chair of the Peacebuilding Commission wrote to the president of the Security Council providing advice on the peacebuilding priorities for Guinea-Bissau (A/62/768-S/2008/208). Similarly, on 30 May 2008 the president of the Security Council sent a letter to the chair of the PBC supporting the request by the Central African Republic to be placed on the agenda of the PBC and requesting advice and recommendations on the situation in the country (A/62/864-S/2008/383), resulting in that country’s addition to the Commission’s agenda.

Following an invitation from the Security Council, the chair of the Sierra Leone configuration provided a briefing to the Security Council on progress made in respect of implementing the country’s peacebuilding framework on 14 December 2007.

On 7 May 2008, the chair of the Sierra Leone configuration was invited to brief the Security Council on the recent developments in Sierra Leone and provided recommendations on the continued integrated presence of the United Nations in the country.

On 26 March and 22 May 2008, the Security Council received oral updates from the chairperson of the Guinea-Bissau configuration on the progress of the Commission’s work on Guinea-Bissau and the situation in the country. Based on her exploratory mission, documents prepared by the PBSO and the initial discussions of the Guinea-Bissau configuration, the chair of that country’s PBC configuration wrote to the president of the Security Council, conveying to him the preliminary findings of the Commission on peacebuilding priorities for that country (A/62/768-S/2008/208), in response to the Council’s 11 December 2007 request for such an update (S/2007/744).

The General Assembly, held its first annual debate to consider the report of the PBC on the first year of its work on 10 October 2007 which provided a forum for the Commission to hear the views of the wider UN membership on matters relating to its work. Further interaction took place on 29 January 2008 when the chair of the Organisational Committee, upon an invitation from the president of the General Assembly, updated the Assembly on the work of the Commission in an informal plenary meeting.

On 22 July ECOSOC held a panel discussion with members of the PBC on ways to support peace efforts and long-term development in countries emerging from war. During the meeting ECOSOC was urged to enhance its interaction with post-conflict countries and expand its cooperation with the Commission.

The PBC chairs also engaged in various activities of outreach and advocacy, implementing a strategy aimed at raising the profile and increasing the visibility of the Commission in different quarters, galvanising resources and enhancing awareness about the work of the PBC.

The chair of the Organisational Committee participated in a number of public events related the work of the Commission and to peacebuilding, including those organised by the Government of Japan (24 January 2008) and by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (13 June 2008), as well as a number of events arranged by other stakeholders. In his attempt to raise the visibility and recognition of the PBC in the international system and strengthening cooperation with other principal UN organs he scheduled regular meetings with the Security Council, General Assembly, ECOSOC as well as the Secretary-General.

He also reached out to the IFIs. On 20 March 2008, he met with senior representatives of the World Bank in Washington DC to explore ways of strengthening the coordination of efforts between the World Bank and the Commission. Subsequently, the chair reported that the World Bank would take the work of the Commission into consideration in its programme planning. He again visited the IFI headquarters in Washington DC on 14 February and 31 March to share information, deepen relations and ensure coherence of work between the PBC and the IFIs.

In a similar effort to engage the IFIs, the chairpersons of the Burundi and the Sierra Leone configurations visited the World Bank and IMF in Washington DC to sensitise them to the objectives of the strategic framework and the engagement between Burundi and the Commission. The discussion with the IMF was an opportunity to take stock of the contribution of the PBC Burundi configuration for resolving the 2007 budgetary crisis of Burundi, as well as to discuss possible collaboration in the follow-up to the conclusion of the sixth review under the IMF Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility or PRGF for that country (, the Executive Board of the IMF completed its sixth and final review of Burundi’s economic performance under the PRGF arrangement which amounted to about $110.3 million in total. The completion of the review cleared the way for the release of about $11.4 million which marked the final disbursement available under the arrangement. The IMF’s PRGF is a concessional facility for low-income countries intended to support programs derived from country-owned poverty reduction strategies which are adopted in a participatory process involving civil society and development partners and clearly set out in a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper). The visit was also used by the two chairs to hold discussions with, and advocate for support from representatives of the US government concerning the work of the Commission with emphasis on the situation of the two countries.

Following the Sierra Leone configuration’s 17 January agreement on a work plan for resource mobilisation, outreach and advocacy, the chair of the Sierra Leone configuration visited Washington DC, London, Brussels, Berlin and The Hague and convened meetings with representatives of the private sector, foundations and international financial institutions to raise awareness about the framework and garner political and financial support.

Private Sector
On 19 February 2008, the Organisational Committee held a discussion on the theme “The role of the private sector in peacebuilding: contribution by the Peacebuilding Commission” with participants including representatives of the International Financial Corporation of the World Bank and the . They presented areas for possible partnerships between their respective entities and the Commission to promote the engagement of the domestic and international private sectors in peacebuilding. Members also presented their views and proposals for encouraging the flow of private human and financial resources to post-conflict countries. Subsequently, a task force, with Indonesia acting as facilitator, was set up to focus on tangible ways through which the Commission could contribute to strengthening the private sector ‘s role in post-conflict peacebuilding, in accordance with the Commission’s mandate to bring together all relevant actors to marshal support and resources. That consideration would include three specific areas:

• microfinance;
• remittances; and
• partnerships with private foundations.

Indonesia presented the outcome document of the task force to the Organisational Committee on 19 June 2008.

Procedures and Working Methods
The Organisational Committee during its second session continued to explore flexible practices on procedural matters that were not initially addressed in its provisional rules of procedure or its working methods, including addressing routine procedural matters through the method of taking decisions on a non-objection basis (also known as the “silence procedure”) and the issuance of “conclusions and recommendations.”

Lessons Learned Group
The Working Group on Lessons Learned, established in December 2006 to analyse best practices and lessons on critical peacebuilding issues, continued to contribute to the deliberations of the Commission on to the countries on its agenda. The Group interacted with a number of international and national actors, expert practitioners and policy analysts, as well as drawing on expertise of member states which had relevant post-conflict experience, in order to help the Group achieve its objectives. It held a number of informal meetings during the second session of the Commission, which focused on lessons and good practices, including those associated with:

• the design and monitoring of peacebuilding strategic frameworks in fragile states (19 September 2007) ;
• constraints on fiscal capacities in post-conflict countries (8 November 2007);
• challenges to local governance and decentralisation in post-war contexts (13 December 2007);
• enhancing women’s participation in peacebuilding (29 January 2008);
• promotion of justice in times of transition (26 February 2008);
• internal displacement in post-war settings 13 March 2008); and
• the interplay between the environment, natural resources, conflict and peacebuilding (8 May 2008).

Relationship with Civil Society
The founding resolutions of the PBC recognise the importance of civil society in its work and peacebuilding in general, and the Commission has since developed guidelines for civil society participation in its meetings and activities. While the Commission’s enabling resolutions urged the active participation of civil society, with the latter’s representatives being invited to make presentations at several PBC meetings, it appears that during the second session civil society was most active in country specific contexts. For instance there were informal NGO briefings on Burundi and Sierra Leone to the respective country configurations on 16 and 17 June respectively. Organisations that conducted the briefings included ActionAID, Human Rights Watch and International Peace Institute. The underlying reasons for greater civil society involvement in country-specific contexts seem to be that civil society is more involved directly in peacebuilding in the field and interest therefore drifted more naturally towards country-specific meetings. Also, the cumbersome procedural regulations governing civil society participation in Organisational Committee meetings—including various requirements for eligibility to participate—have been cited as a practical deterrent for detailed participation in the Organisational Committee’s work.

top

Expected Action
Security Council
21 October has been set as the date for the Council’s consideration of the PBC’s second annual report. (The Council’s open debate to consider the Commission’s first report took place on 17 October 2007.)

Additional Countries for the PBC Agenda
With four countries already on its agenda (Burundi, Central African Republic, Guinea-Bissau and Sierra Leone), the PBC appears ready to consider the feasibility of adding some additional countries. In part this signals growing optimism among the Commission’s members about the positive prospects for the PBC’s work. The April request by Côte d’Ivoire to be placed on its agenda, seems likely be given serious consideration in 2009, subject to the outcome of the country’s upcoming presidential election scheduled to take place on 30 November.

Other countries that may be considered for the PBC’s future agenda include Timor-Leste, Liberia and Nepal.

Integrated Strategies
A widely agreed aspect of the added value that the PBC brings is its ability to provide the forum for agreeing on Integrated Peacebuilding Strategies.

Since the Commission adopted its integrated framework for peacebuilding in Guinea-Bissau on 1 October it has been working on creating a monitoring and tracking mechanism for the framework. The mechanism is expected to be finalised in October.

Regarding the Central African Republic, the tentative expectation is that the country will officially present its peacebuilding priorities to the country-specific configuration in October, after which work is expected to start in the PBC on the country’s strategic framework for cooperation.

The Peacebuilding Fund
The Secretary-General has indicated his intention to initiate a review of the PBF’s terms of reference to further strengthen the Fund to enable it achieve the best results after receiving a report from the UN’s Office of Internal Oversight Services. The anticipated review falls in line with the biennial range anticipated by the terms of reference of the Fund (A/60/984) for such an exercise to be carried out.

Organisational Matters
An unresolved issue is the disagreement on the election of a new bureau for the third year of the PBC Organisational Committee. The general hope is that the impasse over the division of PBC seats among the regional groups will be resolved by the end of 2008.

It seems likely that Japan will relinquish its role as PBC chair but it will retain its seat on the PBC as a top financial contributor until 2010 since its seat was renewed for two years.

top

Analysis of PBC Outcomes
The creation of the PBC put in motion a whole new set of opportunities achieving better outcomes for setting priorities and achieving better outcomes in post conflict situations. At this stage, assessment of the achievement of the Commission’s first two years is not easy because it is still quite early for impacts on the ground to be realised. Nevertheless, after the completion of its second year, certain conclusions can be made about the impact of the work of the Commission.

Firstly, and unusually in the multilateral environment of today, quick agreement has been produced by the PBC on the establishment of major priority setting frameworks for concrete action on the ground. (This includes discussions on the biannual review of the implementation of the Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Burundi; the Sierra Leone Peacebuilding Cooperation Framework; the Monitoring and Tracking Mechanism of the Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Burundi; and the Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Guinea-Bissau.)

Funding Generation
Secondly, the PBC has been instrumental in generating crucial initial funds for Sierra Leone and Burundi. ($35 million funding packages were secured to meet initial peacebuilding priorities.) Guinea-Bissau has since been allocated an initial amount of $6 million by the PBF to deal with immediate priorities, such as tackling youth unemployment and elections. This approach was viewed by the Commission as providing an innovative two-tier means that would afford additional funding to buttress a comprehensive priority plan which will be better aligned with the strategic framework being considered by the PBC. It, however, remains to be seen whether the initial large tranches secured for PBC countries will be sustained, increased or dwindle.

Donor Integration
Thirdly, in terms of integrating the national policies of donor countries, there have been some identifiable alignments in-line with the country-specific priorities identified by the PBC. For instance, Norway announced on 23 June that it would be doubling the amount of its financial assistance to the Burundian government to help consolidate peace. The Commission was also instrumental in convincing the IMF to convene its sixth review meeting on PRGFs for Burundi which cleared the way for the release of about $11.4 million, marking the final disbursement available under the arrangement, despite its initial strong reservations about certain lapses in governance issues.

Similarly, during the 1 October PBC meeting to adopt the strategic framework for Guinea-Bissau, Mexico indicated that it would provide experts from its electoral federal commission to assist in the 16 November elections and expressed hope that the offer would be the first step towards longer-term cooperation to assist in increasing Guinea-Bissau’s capacity in the areas of security sector reform, war on drugs, social integration and anti-poverty programmes. Similarly, Spain indicated its approval of voluntary contributions of €500 million to assist in financing the electoral process and to strengthen Guinea-Bissau’s electoral system as a whole. Also the World Bank stated its support for the strategic framework and announced that $5 million had been approved for a project to help Guinea-Bissau tackle rising food prices.

An important test that remains to be conducted is whether the flow of assistance is adjusted in reaction to identified gaps by the PBC (such as lack of programmes to address issues that the PBC and governments identify as a priorities) or have been “randomly” or “unilaterally” embarked upon by the donors.

Political Impact
Fourthly, the positive contribution of the PBC has been obvious in terms of galvanising political international support for the peacebuilding priorities of the countries in on the Commission’s agenda.

The PBC is seen as having played a key role in responding quickly to the Sierra Leone Government’s political need for the energy sector (i.e. electricity) to be added as a priority in peacebuilding in the context of the integrated framework for Sierra Leone. This initiative appears to have widened the scope for considering similar adaptive action in other peacebuilding contexts, since prior to this development the issue of energy had not been featured in identified peacebuilding priorities for countries on the Commission’s agenda. (The Sierra Leone configuration adopted a chair’s declaration on the then upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections to be held in the country. Subsequent elections on 11 August 2007, the run-off presidential election on 5 September 2007 and the peaceful transition of power from one democratically elected leader to another were a remarkable achievement by the people of Sierra Leone.)

The Commission was also seen as being instrumental in contributing to the high-level international calls for reduction of tensions resulting from the political crisis between the Burundian government and the rebel Palipehutu-FNL, during the PBC visit to the country in May 2008 in the immediate aftermath of the outbreak of violent conflict between the two parties.

It seems that, Guinea-Bissau will provide a challenging case in this regard in 2009.

Local Ownership and Leadership
It is difficult at this stage to assess the effect of the PBC’s work beyond mainly the financial and political support in affected countries. Fostering local assumption of leadership and ownership has been identified as critical in the peacebuilding processes. It is still too soon yet to provide solid analysis of these processes.

Role of the PBC Leadership
During the first year the chair was required to devote significant time to galvanising consensus on organisational matters including the procedural regulations of the PBC. In its second year, the chair was able to begin some outreach and advocacy and build support for the work of the PBC.

The roles of the PBC chairs have been significant in getting the Commission underway since its inception in 2005. In addition, the initiative and drive of the country-specific chairpersons has been critical in beginning to establish the systems for impact on the ground including, in particular, the frameworks for establishing the priorities and generating resources. Doing this has required input of significant national capacity, including personnel and resources, for sponsorship (outside the UN’s budgetary allocation) of the various visits to the affected countries, IFIs and strategic capitals. The country-specific chairpersons appear to have taken this in stride during the second session, and this has contributed to the success of their work. It, however, raises questions for the future. Countries without adequate resources to take up chairmanship posts seem likely to struggle unless the UN budget can begin to cover these costs.

Coordinating Approaches to the PBC Annual Report
The PBC is mandated to report annually to the General Assembly and the Security Council and consequently these reports are simultaneously transmitted to both bodies upon their adoption by the Organisational Committee. During the first consideration of the Commission’s report in 2007, the General Assembly and the Security Council appear to have timed their respective discussions to occur within short time span to retain interest and focus.

The Security Council, seemingly motivated by the fact that all the countries on the PBC’s agenda are also on the Council’s agenda, decided to limit participation of in its 2007 debate on the PBC’s first session report. Participation was restricted to Council members, the chair of the Organisational Committee, chairs of the PBC country-specific configurations, the two countries that were then on the Council’s agenda (Burundi and Sierra Leone) and the chair of the PBC Working Group on Lessons Learned.

In the General Assembly, its discussion, as always, was open to all members of the UN. At the 2007 meeting nearly fifty countries made statements—significantly more than the 31 member states of the PBC—indicating the degree of interest in the PBC’s work.

In view of the fact that the General Assembly was deliberating on the report of a subsidiary body, statements were to be made from the Assembly’s podium. This format was reportedly acceded to in recognition of the prominent role that members wanted to accord to the PBC and is likely to be maintained.

Lessons Learned
The flexibility of the Commission to amending approaches to its activities as appropriate, against the general multilateral backdrop of difficulty in achieving similar change in the intergovernmental UN system, is an important achievement. The PBC appears also to have drawn on lessons learned from its experiences during the first year to improve its operations during the second year. For instance, when early allotments by the PBF of $35 million each to Burundi and Sierra Leone posed difficulties of coherence and coordination for the PBC (which had not yet drawn up the integrated peacebuilding frameworks for those countries), the Commission encouraged the use of the two-tiered funding approach to support quick impact (e.g. when a country is admitted onto the PBC agenda) and longer term (e.g. after the adoption of an integrated peacebuilding framework) peacebuilding projects as has been done in the case of Guinea-Bissau during the second session. In another instance, the chairs of the configurations of newly admitted countries spared no time in quickly undertaking field trips to explain the objectives of the PBC’s work to the national stakeholders, as well familiarise themselves with the situation in their assigned countries.

While the Working Group on Lessons Learned held a number of topic relevant thematic discussions, there is a lingering concern among some member states as to how the Working Group could better forge concrete linkages between the outcomes of such thematic meetings and draw up best practices for relevant application especially in the country-specific configuration work of the Commission.

top

Looking Ahead
PBC Chair
The central role the chair of the Commission plays in steering the direction of the PBC’s work is likely to continue. Continued pursuit of key priorities is expected (e.g. delivering tangible results to meet the requirements of the countries under consideration, engaging in close cooperation with the rest of the UN system, consideration of additional countries for the PBC agenda).

A number of questions raised by the Chair during the concluding meeting of the second session of the PBC on 22 June will also be pursued.

• Is the PBC attempting to apply the same template to different cases?
• Is solid national ownership and the primary responsibility of national authorities for peacebuilding present, respected and supported?
• Are the linkages between security, development and human rights and rule of law adequately prioritised and sequenced as crucial building blocks for peacebuilding to ensure smooth transitions from peacekeeping activities?
• Are steady efforts for advancing a constructive political process for peace being effectively made for consolidating peace?
• Is an appropriate mix of support in place to ensure effective balances in government affairs to promote institutional capacity building and reform for capable and accountable nation building?
• Is there speedy and timely provision of tangible peace dividends available to the people in order to ensure a smooth transition to recovery and economic development?
• Are coordinated, coherent and integrated approaches being put in place, to bring all the relevant actors together, to handle national and international efforts to promote a smooth transition on the ground?
• Has political will been demonstrated to take a longer-term view with regard to sustainable engagement?
• Is there readiness to respond to the call of countries that require international attention and support?

New Countries for PBC Agenda
Discussions on possible new candidates for the PBC agenda, including Côte d’Ivoire, as mentioned above, are likely in early 2009. However PBC members will increasingly be taking into account the overall scale of the post-conflict demand and ability to garner adequate resources to meet newly identified peacebuilding priorities, willingness of national authorities of eligible countries to work constructively with the PBC and the capacity of the PBC to adequately cope with the attendant increased work load.

Organisational Matters
Given the protracted and diverse challenges that have emerged in the selection of representatives to Organisational Committee, the issue of better defining electoral criteria could feature prominently during the first review of the Commission anticipated by the founding resolutions to come up at the close of 2010.

PBSO Capacity
As more countries are added to the agenda of the PBC, there is also the need to review the PBSO’s capacity to cope with any additional workload, especially in terms of commensurate dedicated staffing. This may not be easy given the constraints on the UN budget. The PBSO has been vital in working towards system wide coherence in peacebuilding. But the matters it has been currently tasked with seem close to occupying its full capacity. A realistic assessment will have to be taken of its needs in the event of more responsibilities that might come with the addition of new countries to the Commission’s agenda.

top

UN Documents

Other Relevant Facts

Useful Additional Resources

• Taking Stock, Looking Forward: A Strategic Review of the Peacebuilding Commission, Center on International Cooperation and International Peace Academy, April 2008
• Peacebuilding Commission Update, a news and information project of the Institute for Global Policy on the UN PBC which can be found at http://www.pbcupdate.org/?cat=7
• UN Institute for Disarmament Research, Disarmament Forum: The PBC http://www.unidir.ch/bdd/fiche-periodique.php?ref_periodique=1020-7287-2007-2-en

top

• Print
• Share

• Share or print this post