House of Commons - International Development

Select Committee on International Development Written Evidence

Memorandum submitted by Saferworld

THE UN AND CONFLICT PREVENTION

Saferworld is an independent non-governmental organisation (NGO) that is working internationally to prevent armed violence, increase human security and create conditions for sustainable development. We have programmes in Africa, Europe and South Asia where we work with international agencies, governments and international and local NGOs. Conflict prevention and arms export controls form an integral part of our work.

INTRODUCTION

This link between security and development was recognised in a number of reports published in the run-up to the UN Summit. The UN High Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Changes, In Larger Freedom and the Millennium Project Reports all recognised that development cannot take place without first ensuring peaceful and stable conditions: "we will not enjoy development without security".[92] The High Level Panel Report in particular, identified the UN as a key actor in conflict prevention to create conditions to allow for international peace, security and development to foster.

The Millennium Review Summit in New York presented world leaders with a key opportunity to take steps to improve the international community's ability to prevent and resolve violent conflict, and so improve the lives of millions of people living in poverty—and also to build on the momentum created on the G8 Summit and Make Poverty History campaign.

Agreement at the Summit to create a Peacebuilding Commission and recognise the Responsibility to Protect are welcome. However, opportunities were also missed, particularly in the areas of improving the Peacebuilding Commission with a preventive mandate that would allow for more effective protection of the world's poor.

In addition, the complete failure by world leaders to include any language on disarmament, of both conventional weapons and small arms and light weapons proved a loss that will hinder the UN's responsibility to secure stability and development for all. Without effective security measures to protect populations that aim to prevent conflict, the poor will continue to suffer the plight of insecurity and under-development.

The UK Government has already declared its commitment to an Arms Trade Treaty, [93]to a preventive role for the Peacebuilding Commission and affirmed its support for the "Responsibility to Protect".[94]

The Government should now share with Parliament and civil society its strategy for ensuring the effective implementation of the gains made at the Summit. It must also explain how it plans to work towards the securing of international cooperation on its pledges that failed to reach agreement at the Summit.

Saferworld urges the UK Government to :

— Continue to work actively to promote effective international arms transfer and brokering controls, including through the agreement of an international Arms Trade Treaty.

— Work with UN partners to ensure the Peacebuilding Commission is mandated, structured and resourced to play an effective role in post-conflict peacebuilding and development, and to promote the development of a conflict prevention mandate for the Peacebuilding Commission.

— Continue to work to secure agreement amongst Security Council Members to relinquish the right of the veto in cases of genocide, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity; and works with the UN, EU, G8, the African Union and other partners to ensure that the international system is equipped to enforce the responsibility to protect.

Disarmament and Non-Proliferation

Arms continue to be exported and brokered to developing countries, exacerbating conflicts and undermining human rights and development. The UN's Security Council brings together some of the world's largest arms exporting and supplier nations.

Draft outcome documents in the run up to the Summit committed on Member States to "adopt and implement an international instrument to regulate the marking and tracing, illicit brokering, trade and transfer of small arms and light weapons. [95]" However, following changes by the United States, issues of disarmament, including this commitment, were entirely omitted from the final document—a situation described as "a real disgrace" by Kofi Annan.

A binding international agreement on arms transfers and brokering is a fundamental tool in conflict prevention. The failure to agree effective international controls to curb the proliferation and misuse of weapons will only continue to hinder development in poor countries—a fact recognised by the UK Government in its pursuit of an ATT and other initiatives.

Since the UN Summit, the European Union has declared its support for an "international treaty to establish common standards for the global trade in conventional arms". In its declaration, the EU "agreed that the United Nations was the only forum that could deliver a truly universal instrument and called for the start of a formal process at the United Nations at the earliest opportunity. [96]" The EU joins 30 countries worldwide that support this initiative.

The UK Government has shown admirable leadership in the area of international arms transfer control and has committed to start negotiations on an ATT "no later than 2006." [97]It is incumbent upon the Government to stay committed to the ATT and to develop effective strategies to gain international agreement to it.

— The Government must continue to work actively to promote effective international arms transfer and brokering controls, including through the agreement of an international Arms Trade Treaty.

The Peacebuilding Commission—a preventive mandate

The agreement in principle reached at the Summit for the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission is a welcome addition to the UN structures. Half of all countries that emerge from civil war regress back into violent conflict within five years and the current international system has no body to co-ordinate efforts to assist countries emerging from conflicts.

The Summit agreed to set up the Peacebuilding Commission before the end of the year. In finalising the mandate of the Commission, setting up its organisational structures, and putting in place its Support Office and Peacebuilding Fund (to provide vital early financing for reconstruction), the UN must ensure that it has the full powers and resources necessary to make a real impact to the needs of post-conflict countries. Those responsible for its construction must ensure that it is an effective body, able to work efficiently to build on years of international experience of post-conflict peacebuilding and able to draw in all the relevant actors to ensure co-ordination and promote sensible action. It should ensure that there are strong linkages between short-term interventions in the immediate post-conflict period and long-term development. The experience of the Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Assistance (OCHA) has demonstrated how difficult co-ordination can be—the Peacebuilding Commission needs to be equipped to avoid similar problems.

At the same time, without a greater mandate to prevent the outbreak of conflicts in the first place, the Peacebuilding Commission will have limited ability to promote collective security and development.

In the run up to the Summit, the UN's High Level Panel's Report recommended that the Commission concentrate efforts "in a coherent and effective way throughout a whole continuum that runs from early warning through preventive action to post-conflict peacebuilding". Saferworld believes the Peacebuilding Commission should work actively with states, not only at the point of crisis, but have constructive engagement at an early stage as risks are identified. The Commission's core functions should include: "the identification of countries which are under stress and risk sliding towards state collapse . . . (and) . . . to organise, in partnership with the national government, proactive assistance in preventing that process from developing further. [98]" These core functions would allow the UN to fulfil its responsibility to ensure freedom from fear for all—a concept enshrined in the In Larger Freedom Report—allowing it to act responsibly and preventively as and when states are identified as being at risk of failing to protect their population.

To ensure that stability and development can prosper and to encourage a comprehensive strategy in addressing global insecurity, the UK Government should:

Responsibility to Protect—Security Council Member Veto

A significant breakthrough at the Summit was the international community's new commitment to protect populations from genocide, war crimes and ethnic cleansing. The UN now has a humanitarian responsibility to defend populations from atrocities if national authorities are unable or unwilling to do so and any attempt to block assistance to respond to crises is irresponsible. However, text urging members of the Security Council to not to exercise the veto when making decisions on intervention in such cases of crimes against humanity was dropped.

If the UN is to prevent atrocities such as those observed in Rwanda and Bosnia which lead to the loss of thousands of lives, it is imperative that such decisions on intervention are not impeded by the veto.

The responsibility to protect will be meaningless if it cannot be implemented. The Responsibility to Protect includes the responsibility to prevent, to react and to rebuild—attention should be given to all aspects. The roles and responsibilities of the different parts of the international system in upholding the responsibility to protect—particularly between the UN and regional and sub-regional groups—must to be clarified to improve the efficiency of responses. As the Millennium Summit document recognises, the capacity of those parts of the international system, such as the African Union and African sub-regional organisations, that play a leading role but have limited resources needs to be improved in a sustainable and comprehensive manner.

To allow the UN to fulfil its responsibility to ensure freedom from fear for all and allow development to progress, the UK Government should:

October 2005