STATEMENT

by H.E. Ambassador Hoang Chi Trung, Chargé d’Affaire a.i.

at the Open Debate of the Security Council of the United Nations

on “Post-conflict Peacebuilding”

New York, 22 July 2009

------------

 

 Mr. President,

 At the outset, I would like to congratulate you, Mr. President, for convening this thematic debate. I also wish to thank Secretary-General for introducing his report on peacebuilding in the immediate aftermath of conflicts.

 Mr. President,

 Since the inception of the “Agenda for Peace” 17 years ago, post-conflict peacebuilding has evolved into an integral part of the collective efforts by the international community to remove the prolonged effects of conflicts and support the smooth transition to lasting peace and sustainable development. Experiences in Namibia, El Salvador, Angola, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Burundi, Liberia and Timor-Leste remain vivid examples demonstrating that effective peacebuilding can break the vicious circle of instability and under-development to bring about a virtuous cycle of security, reconciliation and reconstruction.

The learning curve in other situations unfolds the fact that even though the end of conflict tends to create high expectations for the prompt and concrete delivery of political, social and economic dividends to the local population, it does not necessarily mean the arrival of a durable peace. The immediate post-conflict period is critical to address a pool of opportunities as well as challenges to disarm, demobilize and reintegrate ex-combatants, strengthen the rule of law and security sector reform, promote inclusive dialogue and reconciliation, support the return and reintegration of refugees and internally displaced persons, restore government functions and jump-start economic revitalization. In the longer run, substantive investments into poverty reduction and hunger eradication, essential public services, employment creation, social parity, institutional capacity-building and the Millennium Development Goals, among others, will serve as lynchpins to uproot the under-currents of conflicts and lay the foundations for nation-building efforts. Should these recurring priorities be addressed early on, the post-conflict journey towards the steady state of peace, stability and prosperity can be much less bumpy.

Mr. President,

The fast-moving and uncertain post-conflict environment requires the dovetailed support and cooperation from the plethora of multilateral agencies and international stakeholders concerned. Over the past years, the United Nations has been working diligently to enhance its efficiency and effectiveness through reform efforts in the pillars of peace and security, development, human rights, humanitarian affairs and international law.  Standing at the very heart of the international peacebuilding architecture, the Peacebuilding Commission, the Peacebuilding Support Office and the Peacebuilding Fund have played a central role as the dedicated institutional mechanism to sustain attention, mobilize resources and improve coherence while addressing critical gaps, needs and priorities in countries emerging from conflict.  Given that many conflicts trigger cross-border dimensions, regional and subregional organizations have established support frameworks to bring their comparative advantage on knowledge of the local specific conditions to bear on the peacebuilding work. At this time of global resource constraints, international financial institutions have also worked to align funding decisions behind immediate and medium-term peacebuilding and recovery assistance.

Assigned with differing mandates, guiding principles, governance structures and financing arrangements, United Nations agencies and other partners involved early in the revival of countries that have experienced hot periods of crisis are challenged with the over-riding need to move forward clarity on roles and responsibilities, rational prioritization and division of labor, shared planning and analysis, stronger partnerships and greater accountability. It is imperative that their efforts be coordinated and integrated so that all available resources can be utilized to capacity while simultaneously reducing unnecessary overlap or competition and maintaining economies of scale. In this regard, we welcome and look forward to further concrete results in implementing the Secretary-General’s agenda on strengthening and supporting leadership teams in the field, promoting earlier strategic coherence, reinforcing national capacity from the outset, improving the ability to provide rapid and predictable capacities, and enhancing the speed, flexibility, amount and risk tolerance of post-conflict financing.

Mr. President,

Even with the best intentions, external assistance to promote and strengthen war-to-peace stabilization processes will likely be regarded as an imposition unless the cardinal principles of respect for the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-intervention into internal affairs of States are strictly persevered and the beneficiary host countries are given ample space to determine policy options and decision-making in the pursuit of their goals and objectives. As the legitimate masters and the biggest beneficiaries of peacebuilding, local populations must be empowered and involved in every step of this long-term endeavor. The entrance, implementation and exit of international assistance should be tailored to and driven by the specific needs and priorities of the country in question, with the consent of local parties and within the overall framework of maximally drawing on and developing the national ownership, self-resilience and self-reliance.

Along this line, while registering our steadfast support to the cause of peacebuilding, Viet Nam stands ready to share its related experience of capacity development and international cooperation with all interested stakeholders.

     I thank you, Mr. President.