GSDRC

Governance, social development, conflict and humanitarian knowledge services

  • Research
    • Governance
      • Democracy & elections
      • Public sector management
      • Security & justice
      • Service delivery
      • State-society relations
      • Supporting economic development
    • Social Development
      • Gender
      • Inequalities & exclusion
      • Poverty & wellbeing
      • Social protection
    • Conflict
      • Conflict analysis
      • Conflict prevention
      • Conflict response
      • Conflict sensitivity
      • Impacts of conflict
      • Peacebuilding
    • Humanitarian Issues
      • Humanitarian financing
      • Humanitarian response
      • Recovery & reconstruction
      • Refugees/IDPs
      • Risk & resilience
    • Development Pressures
      • Climate change
      • Food security
      • Fragility
      • Migration & diaspora
      • Population growth
      • Urbanisation
    • Approaches
      • Complexity & systems thinking
      • Institutions & social norms
      • Theories of change
      • Results-based approaches
      • Rights-based approaches
      • Thinking & working politically
    • Aid Instruments
      • Budget support & SWAps
      • Capacity building
      • Civil society partnerships
      • Multilateral aid
      • Private sector partnerships
      • Technical assistance
    • Monitoring and evaluation
      • Indicators
      • Learning
      • M&E approaches
  • Services
    • Research Helpdesk
    • Professional development
  • News & commentary
  • Publication types
    • Helpdesk reports
    • Topic guides
    • Conflict analyses
    • Literature reviews
    • Professional development packs
    • Working Papers
    • Webinars
    • Covid-19 evidence summaries
  • Projects
  • About us
    • Staff profiles
    • International partnerships
    • Privacy policy
    • Terms and conditions
    • Contact Us
Home»Document Library»ONUB and the Importance of Local Ownership: The Case of Burundi

ONUB and the Importance of Local Ownership: The Case of Burundi

Library
Laurent Banal, Vincenza Scherrer
2008

Summary

What lessons can be learned from the United Nations (UN) Mission to Burundi? This research, from the Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF), argues that the UN made a significant contribution to the peace process in Burundi. However, this case study also raises the importance of not underestimating the inherent tension between external imposition and local ownership. Managing the fundamental differences between how each actor conceives of SSR and perceives its core priorities is a fundamental challenge for the whole SSR process.

The UN contributed to the peace process in Burundi through its support for the holding of democratic elections. In 2005, these elections took place. This transition from a country torn apart by conflict has generated optimism over possibilities for the post-conflict future of the country. However, although progress has been made to alleviate security concerns, the political and human rights situation of the country remains fragile and the security situation tense.

In terms of SSR, the UN played a significant role in facilitating reform and in providing technical training to the security forces. The UN also played a role in attempting to coordinate international efforts in SSR in order to minimise gaps and overlap of different support activities. The UN had a comparative advantage over other actors because it had the human resources necessary to undertake such tasks. Moreover, the undertaking of a mapping exercise to support these efforts was a useful tool for coordination.

Several lessons can be identified from the UN’s approach to SSR in Burundi:

  • If core funding is not secured for SSR it is hard to gain the confidence of government authorities, particularly when their urgent requirements cannot be met.
  • There was not enough funding for basic logistical support for the armed forces to build barracks, housing and military hospitals.
  • When a government does not want to approach SSR holistically, it is not clear whether outsiders should prioritise coherence or local ownership.
  • It is important to develop a joint SSR strategy, in collaboration with the government.
  • It is important to hold broad discussions with a transitional government but only to work with elected authorities who have the legitimacy and authority to take decisions on SSR.

In order to provide targeted support to the national authorities in the transformation of Burundi’s security institutions and processes, the following recommendations should be considered:

  • The creation of an SSR capacity at UN headquarters would provide the necessary support and guidance to the field level. The UN should recruit French-speaking civilian staff and people with specific skills, rather than generalists.
  • Peacekeeping missions should have funding capacities to implement limited SSR-related projects that respond to the immediate concerns of the national partners.
  • Cooperation and communication need to be improved with national stakeholders and multinational partners.
  • There should be a senior-level post in the mission to negotiate with national authorities and to ensure that the UN speaks with a coherent voice on SSR issues.
  • Public information campaigns should be used in support of the SSR process to sensitise the local population.
  • Democratic oversight should be addressed from the outset.

Source

Banal, L. and Scherrer, V., 2008, 'ONUB and the Importance of Local Ownership: The Case of Burundi' in Security Sector Reform and UN Integrated Missions: Experience from Burundi, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Haiti, and Kosovo, eds. H. Hänggi & V. Scherrer DCAF, Geneva, Switzerland, pp.

Related Content

Varieties of state capture
Working Papers
2023
Key Drivers of Modern Slavery
Helpdesk Report
2020
Non-State Policing in Fragile Contexts
Helpdesk Report
2019
Drivers and enablers of serious organised crime in Southeast Asia
Helpdesk Report
2019

University of Birmingham

Connect with us: Bluesky Linkedin X.com

Outputs supported by DFID are © DFID Crown Copyright 2026; outputs supported by the Australian Government are © Australian Government 2026; and outputs supported by the European Commission are © European Union 2026

We use cookies to remember settings and choices, and to count visitor numbers and usage trends. These cookies do not identify you personally. By using this site you indicate agreement with the use of cookies. For details, click "read more" and see "use of cookies".