UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY

Statement by H.E. Mr John Dauth LVO
Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Australia
to the United Nations

Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations

New York
3 March 2003

Mr Chairman

Let me begin by welcoming the progress that continues to be made in reforming United Nations peacekeeping. This progress is in no small measure due to the efforts of DPKO under Mr Guehenno’s able leadership. I would like to acknowledge the Secretary-General’s most recent report on implementing the recommendations of this Committee, which shows continued valuable progress in this crucial area of UN activity.

Mr Chairman

As my delegation stated at the last Fourth Committee debate on peacekeeping, the broad outlines of the Brahimi recommendations either have been or are in the process of being implemented. Against this background, we need to consider carefully where the attention of the C34 should now be focused. This question is relevant both to our committee, but also to DPKO. The priorities Mr Guehenno identified in his presentation to the Fourth Committee last October, and which are now reflected in the latest Secretary-General’s report, provide us with a useful point of departure.

By focusing on these priorities or strategic objectives we have the opportunity to lift our gaze out of the weeds, so to speak, and get a clearer perspective of the path ahead. We need to keep this perspective in mind, particularly when we turn to the text of the C34 Report. The core value-added of our committee should be to work with DPKO to set the broad strategic directions, and to monitor and make sure that we are achieving measurable progress.

It would, however, be counter-productive for the C34 to seek to micro-manage DPKO or the Secretariat more generally. We certainly want the Secretariat to be accountable to Member States, but we should aim to achieve this with the least burden. This is consistent with the Secretary-General’s reform objectives, one element of which is to cut down on the number and length of Secretariat reports.

How are we to achieve this sort of true partnership with DPKO? Communication and transparency are obviously important. We value the improvements in consultations with TCCs and the various briefings and seminars that have been arranged. These activities should continue and they should help to ensure on-going dialogue during the longish period between the C34 Session and the Fourth Committee consideration of peacekeeping.

We also see particular benefit to be gained by using the Best Practices Unit as an interface between the Secretariat and Member States, providing an additional avenue for dialogue. Recruitment of staff with the appropriate skills sets is important and we note that this process is nearing completion. But if the Best Practices Unit is to realise its full potential, we must be judicious in the demands we make of it. Excessive demands would run the risk of undermining the Unit’s ability to provide focused and value-added analysis. Far better that the Unit manage a moderate agenda well than struggle under the weight of an unwieldy and overloaded work program.

The Best Practices Unit’s objectives could be assisted by instituting coordination between it and individual member states with policy expertise in peacekeeping. In this regard, we support the call in the Secretary-General’s Report for member states to consider building a relationship between national centres of peacekeeping research and the Best Practices Unit. The key issue, however, for the Unit and the UN will be how well recommendations from best practice studies are implemented.

Mr Chairman

I do not intend to comment on all the priority areas identified in the Secretary-General’s report. We will do so in the course of the committee’s deliberations over the next three weeks. Suffice it to say that we broadly endorse the priorities – many of which, including DD&R, are of great relevance to our region. I should say, however, that the basic logic of now turning our attention from headquarters reform to field implementation is absolutely correct. What happens in the field is, after all, the ultimate arbiter of success, not what happens in New York. Nevertheless, we will also need to assess at the appropriate time how well DPKO has done with its new headquarters capabilities. Looking at the quality of the new headquarter staff I am confident that the assessment will be highly favourable.

On field implementation, I would like today to signal two areas which from Australia’s perspective require particular attention. Both were dealt with extensively at the Challenges Seminar which was held in Australia last year:

First, the need for principles and standard procedures to improve accountability in peace operations. The lack of clear disciplinary and accountability guidelines for UN peacekeepers needs to be fixed. We would like to see consideration given to the development of common principles and elaborated guidelines for accountability. These could draw on lessons learnt in previous peace operations and would of course also need to reflect the very different legal traditions and constitutions of contributing and host Member States.

Second, the challenge that rule of law issues pose for complex peacekeeping operations. We are very pleased to see that the Executive Committee on Peace and Security Task Force has issued a valuable report on rule of law strategies. We would appreciate assessments from DPKO on how these strategies are being implemented and whether it considers that we are now properly placed to deal with this issue in planning new missions and improving existing ones.

In this context, we would underscore the urgent need for improvements in the capacity of UN peacekeeping operations to deliver effective support for newly developing police forces where that is part of a mandate. This is of particular relevance to UNMISET, where the success of the mission could very well rest on the quality of assistance that is given to the Timor-Leste police service.

Mr Chairman

In conclusion, let me endorse Mr Guehenno’s comments this morning regarding the need to maintain our focus on consolidating peacekeeping operations around the world. For its part, Australia – which is currently the largest developed country contributor to UN peacekeeping operations – is committed to doing what it can, not least in UNMISET.