The EU and the Peacebuilding Commission

Abstract

What can the world hope for from the Peacebuilding Commission, given the record of the United Nations in this area? And what contribution can the European Union (EU) offer, given its own record in engaging with countries emerging from violent conflict? The essential task in peacebuilding is to restore a war-torn society's capacity to manage its own conflicts. The priority for the Peacebuilding Commission should be to develop international support and legitimacy for this task, avoiding muddying it with the foreign policy objectives of donor states. The EU has much to offer and much to gain from establishing this growing area of global governance on sound principles and internationally accepted lines. The paper argues that the EU can and should play a leading part in developing the Peacebuilding Commission. It reflects on principles that could be applied and practices that should be avoided.

Notes

¹ For 2006, the 31 members will be: (Security Council) China, Denmark, France, Russia, Tanzania, United Kingdom, US; (ECOSOC) Angola, Belgium, Brazil, Guinea Bissau, Indonesia, Poland, Sri Lanka; (top providers of assessed contributions) Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway; (top providers of military personnel and civilian police) Bangladesh, Ghana, India, Nigeria, Pakistan; and (General Assembly) Burundi, Chile, Croatia, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Jamaica.

² For discussions of the scope and challenges facing the Peacebuilding Commission see, for example, International Peace Academy (2006) and Wilton Park Conference (2006).

³ For the distinction between ‘actor goals’ and ‘milieu goals’, see Arnold Wolfers (1962).

⁴ The European Council (2003, paras 84–87) set the strategic objective of ‘making effective multilateralism a central element of its external action’, with ‘a strong UN’ at its heart.

⁵ For a discussion of conflict prevention as a site of governance, see Hugh Miall (2004).

⁶ Indeed, the EU currently supports peacebuilding efforts in situations of ongoing violence, as in Sri Lanka.

⁷ Reconstruction implies large, top-down and often temporary activities, aimed at rebuilding a functioning state. Peacebuilding has the implication of a more comprehensive approach to a conflict's root causes, often requiring a comprehensive engagement at other levels of society beside the elite. For a discussion of the differences, see Ramsbotham et al (2005, chapters 10 and 11).

⁸ For an assessment of what has been counted as ‘success’ and ‘failure’ in different peacebuilding efforts, and the extent to which characteristics of the conflict and of the intervention influence outcomes, see Michael Lund (2003).

⁹ The benefits of an inclusive approach in peacemaking and peacebuilding are recognised in the literature and evident from settlements that stick. See, for example, John Paul Lederach (1997).

¹⁰ The High Commissioner achieved ‘a modicum of trust between would-be warring parties on many of the ragged edges of Europe’, The Economist, 11 September 1999. For an account of his work, which was carried out in close liaison with governments and NGOs in the Hague and in the affected countries, see Walter Kemp (2001) and Peter Harris and Ben Reilly (1998).

¹¹ João de Deus Pinheiro (1999), ‘Peacebuilding and conflict prevention in Africa’, CPN Yearbook 1998/99 (Baden-Baden, Germany: Nomos Verlagesgesellschaft), 20, cited by Erik J Eidem (2004).

¹² Direct application of EU principles is made difficult because these principles have evolved over time and also because of differences in terminology and conceptualisation. The EU defines conflict prevention as ‘short-term measures to reduce manifest tensions and prevent the outbreak or recurrence of violent conflict’, while peacebuilding is regarded as ‘actions undertaken over the medium or longer term to address root causes of violent conflicts in a targeted manner’—a definition different from Boutros-Ghali's; see European Commission (1996).

¹³ Similarly, in Kosovo, the international community's primary role has been to prevent the recurrence of war, rather than to build a peace. The effort to form a unified police force is perhaps the most significant piece of peacebuilding, and some local administrations have Serbs as well as Albanians. The future prospects of the province depend on the outcome of the internationally hosted negotiations over its final status. If these end in something close to independence, many remaining Serbs may leave, and the end state is likely to be an Albanian state with a small Serbian minority rather than a shared state.

¹⁴ Partnership Agreement Between the Members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) Group of States of the One Part, and the European Community and Its Member States of the Other Part, Cotonou, 23 June 2000, Official Journal of the European Communities (2000) L 317/3.

¹⁵ In Africa, for example, the government is often a prize and instrument in regional and ethnic contests for power and resources (Clapham 1996).

¹⁶ These were part of an impressive set of efforts designed to elicit better relationships and new agreements between the army and other groups in Burundi, led by Ambassador Howard Wolpe at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

¹⁷ For another discussion of what the Peacebuilding Commission could do in Burundi, see Gareth Evans (2006).