This paper reviews the debate on ways and means to improve peacebuilding and how this has translated into operational developments in the field, focusing on the main problems and gaps that have emerged so far. It examines three fundamental questions: who should assume political leadership; who should be in charge of the coordination of different actors; and which financing mechanisms should be adopted for peacebuilding.
Key findings:
- Until recently, national efforts in donor countries to articulate consistent policies in post-conflict peacebuilding, including through better internal coordination, and to translate those policies into action have lagged behind progress achieved in these areas by some UN agencies and the international financial institutions (IFIs). There are indications, however, of a renewed interest in post-conflict assistance on the part of donor governments in the last few years. This has been spurred in part by several studies that have highlighted the global costs and risks of civil wars, establishing direct connections between them and terrorism, drug production and trafficking, organized crime, and even the AIDS pandemic. Successfully ending civil wars and creating the basis for sustainable peace are therefore again among the development priorities of some governments, and new institutional adjustments are taking place. Some experts have expressed concern for this new impetus, since it no longer appears to be driven by humanitarian goals, but rather by the “stabilization agenda” imposed in many countries by the post-9/11 anti-terrorist strategy. However, this renewed interest has also generated the momentum needed to revitalize efforts to strengthen the UN’s role in coordinating international peacebuilding activities, as well as to improve the operational tools at its disposal.
- The role of regional organizations in peacekeeping (as well as peace enforcement) operations has been extremely relevant in the last fifteen years. In general terms, the collaboration between the UN and regional organizations in peacekeeping missions has evolved in a pragmatic and complex way, with the support of the vast majority of member states, who agree that the fast-growing demand for complex peacekeeping operations cannot be met exclusively by the UN. As far as peacebuilding operations are concerned, cooperation has started later and has been more limited.
- Some encouraging progress in better coordinating the different main actors is being made in several current operations. All recent improvements seem to be based on the same premise: the realization that the only way to maximize results in post-conflict situations is through better coordination and an improved working relationship among all relevant partners. Much of the recent progress seems to be linked to a more convinced cooperation among UN agencies and departments forming the UN Development Group (UNDG), and the World Bank. This has resulted in the development of innovative tools and reference documents, such as the Practical Guide to Multilateral Needs Assessments in Post-Conflict Situations.
