Summary: July 15, 2004: STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE EUROPEAN UNION BY MR. ARJAN HAMBURGER, DEPUTY PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE. ECONOMIC and SOCIAL COUNCIL. General segment - agenda item 7 (f): Ad hoc advisory groups on African countries emerging from conflict (New York)
Mr President,
I have the honor to take the floor on behalf of the European Union. The Candidate Countries Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey and Croatia, the Countries of the Stabilisation and Association Process and potential candidates Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia and Montenegro, align themselves with this declaration.
African countries emerging from conflict should be among the highest priorities of the United Nations system. The EU considers the decision by ECOSOC to establish the ad hoc advisory groups for Guinea Bissau and Burundi of great significance in terms of a better coordinated and systemic approach by the United Nations community. We recognise the new synergy these ad hoc advisory groups have produced in the relations between ECOSOC and the Security Council. The report by the Secretary General
indeed highlights the fact that the ad hoc advisory groups have overcome an institutional vacuum. They have led to substantive involvement of ECOSOC in Guinea Bissau and Burundi, thereby contributing to a more holistic and coordinated approach of the UN system towards longer term political stability and societal well being in these countries. The EU therefore supports the extension of the mandate of the ad hoc advisory groups of Guinea Bissau and Burundi.
The EU has long held the view that it is ineffective to pursue post-conflict peace-building in the absence of economic and social development, or to pursue economic development outside a clear political framework of good governance. The experience of the ad hoc advisory groups indeed demonstrated that security, governance and development are inextricably linked. The report by the Secretary General on the experiences of the ad hoc advisory groups should be seen in the broader context of ongoing
discussions within the UN intergovernmental machinery on promoting an international coherent response to countries in crisis.
Mr President,
Writing an assessment on the added value of the ad hoc advisory groups cannot have been an easy undertaking. After all, this is a relatively new instrument, and as of yet there is too little experience to draw firm conclusions. The report of the Secretary General, which highlights lessons learned based on the initial experience of these groups, clearly recognises the potential for added value of the ad hoc groups.
The report contains important lessons learned regarding the mechanism of the ad hoc advisory groups. The EU fully shares the conclusion that the effectiveness of their work is greatly enhanced if there is ownership. The demand-driven character is a unique and important feature of the ad hoc advisory groups. The fact that both groups were established upon the request of the governments concerned, indicate their strong willingness in re-engaging the international community in the reconstruction
efforts. As the report indicates, the ad hoc groups have been particularly successful in their advocacy work; in helping to define and describe their economic and political predicament, and in bringing it to the attention of the international community, including the Bretton Woods Institutions. In our view, to maintain effectiveness, the groups should also remain small, representative, balanced and limited in number.
Mr President,
As with all innovative mechanisms, there is always room for further improvement. The EU has identified several issues to make the work of the ad hoc advisory groups more effective.
The interaction between the ad hoc groups and ECOSOC itself has remained somewhat limited, and could be strengthened. There is merit in a more substantive discussion of the reports of the groups in ECOSOC. Not only would it enhance the involvement of the intergovernmental machinery during the transition phase, it would also allow ECOSOC to draw lessons of these country-specific examples, and subsequently fulfil its fundamental role of giving policy guidance to the UN system.
The collaboration between the Security Council and the ECOSOC could also be further intensified. While fully respecting the different roles and mandates of these bodies, a more substantive collaboration on issues where both entities have a role to play -such as demobilisation and reintegration programmes- would yield substantive gains. This could also help minimise the risk that transition countries slip back into a conflict situation, with negative domestic, regional and international
consequences.
The mandate of the ad hoc groups allows them to play an important advocacy role on behalf of the countries concerned. The report highlights the successful contribution the groups have played in this regard, particularly in Guinea Bissau, which was the first group the be established. The ad hoc advisory groups are also mandated to review humanitarian and economic needs and relevant assistance programmes, and to make recommendations for the long-term programme of support based on development
priorities. It is important to monitor progress made at the country level and to gauge the operational impact of the work of the ad hoc advisory groups to ensure these objectives are also met, including on the way the various UN entities work together, at the country level, in transition countries. As the report states, the recommendations made by the groups, while not operational in nature, did point the way for stronger coordination among UN bodies. The EU considers the role the ad hoc
advisory groups can play towards a more effective, coordinated and integrated response of the United Nations as essential.
Mr President,
The mandate of the ad hoc advisory groups is also to provide advice on how to ensure that the assistance of the international community in supporting the country in question is adequate, coherent, well coordinated and effective, and promotes synergy. The EU shares the recommendation contained in the report that the ad hoc advisory groups should liaise more directly with the donor community. This can hopefully contribute to overcome the problem identified in the report by the United Nations
Development Group and the Executive Committee on Humanitarian Affairs on transition issues. This report clearly points out that donor institutional structures for policy and funding decisions tend to separate for humanitarian and development assistance, leading to a lack of coherent policies and funding gaps in transition situations. To the extent possible, the ad hoc advisory groups should liaise with existing mechanisms, such as Round Tables and other conferences, to maximise the mobilisation
of funds.
Mr President,
An essential element in the work of the ad hoc advisory groups is a partnership approach. As stated earlier, the partnership element not only determines the relationship between the international community and country concerned, but also between ECOSOC and the Security Council, within the UN system at large and between UN and BWI. In accordance with ECOSOC resolution 2002/1, the EU would advocate a closer partnership of the ad hoc groups with the operational agencies involved in post conflict
situations, not just in the field but also at the level of headquarters. Discussions with the joint working group on humanitarian issues by UNDG and ECHA should be encouraged. While the ad hoc advisory groups work on country specific situations, they should also draw lessons from the generic policy recommendations from the working group on transition.
Mr President,
The ad hoc advisory groups should remain what they are: ad hoc groups with a limited life span. They are an interim arrangement, serving a specific purpose. It is important that the work of the ad hoc advisory groups does not undercut or duplicate the mandates held by other parts of the UN system. The assessment when an ad hoc advisory group has completed its mission should be determined by the country specific situation. This also means that decisions on the life span of the ad hoc advisory
groups should be linked to a regular, albeit difficult, assessment within ECOSOC. The EU does not consider it useful to develop generic "sunset criteria".
However, it is important to take the issue of limited life span into account when discussing the proposal contained in the document to increase the staff and financial resources of the secretariat to support the ad hoc advisory groups. A balance needs to be struck between securing adequate administrative, and, even more important, technical support to the groups, and the need for flexibility and prudent financial management. Ad hoc arrangements with other agencies in the UN system, such as OCHA
and UNDG, DPA and DPKO, will avoid creating a new, more formal bureaucratic entity. Closer collaboration with partners would also allow the secretariat of the ad hoc groups to avail of broader knowledge and expertise within the UN system, and to avoid overlap and duplication of scarce resources.
Mr President,
As stated before, the EU considers the decision by ECOSOC to establish the Ad Hoc Advisory Groups for Guinea Bissau and Burundi of great significance in terms of a better coordinated and systemic approach by the United Nations community. The United Nations is in a unique position to develop an integrated approach from post-conflict situations to stable peace and societal well being. The EU welcomes the enhanced interaction between the Security Council and ECOSOC in addressing the challenges of
peace building in countries emerging from conflict. The substantive involvement of ECOSOC in country specific situations following a crisis is innovative and meaningful, and can help ECOSOC in the formulation of informed policy guidance on transition situations.
Mr President,
No discussion on the ad hoc working groups can be complete without mentioning the special role of the chairman of both groups, H.E. Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo, Permanent Representative of South Africa. It is his leadership and vision that has helped to advance the discussion on the interactive relationship between security and development.
| Top |
European Union Member States
Alerts by email
Email this page
Print this page