Swisspeace annual conference - Keynote address "Responding to violent conflict in the future”

Dr. Kellenberger,
Prof. Götschel,
Ambassador Spoljaric,
Ladies and gentlemen,


It is a pleasure to participate in the swisspeace annual conference. I congratulate swisspeace for the excellent work done over the years. Our cooperation is a great example of how knowledge, expertise and innovation coming from a renowned research institute and think tank adds value to the UN’s work.

In particular, I want to highlight your activities in the area of mediation, carried out under your Mediation Support Project. The guidance for effective mediation, prepared by our Department of Political Affairs with your assistance, has now become an essential tool for mediators around the world. Next year, UN envoys and special representatives will be invited to a high-level mediation course, organized in collaboration with swisspeace. This training will provide the necessary skills and tools for those brokering peace in practice. Thank you for contributing to develop and enhance the necessary capacities of those working at the frontlines.

Mediation is also a priority for the United Nations Office at Geneva. I am particularly grateful that - thanks to the generous contribution of the Government of Switzerland - we could establish a senior mediation officer position to support prevention and diplomatic peace-making efforts. The investment in this post has already paid off. Since the arrival of our senior mediation officer Enrico Formica, who could unfortunately not be with us today, we have been able to provide better substantive support to our Envoys as Geneva is becoming an ever more sought after venue for mediation. We have been seeing a clear increase in the number of mediation processes taking place in Geneva.

Geneva is a well-established mediation hub which will, I believe, significantly develop further. In a fragmented world, its geographical location places it in proximity of some of the major conflicts preoccupying us all today. The Palais des Nations provides for a conducive environment for negotiations thanks to its history, well tested infrastructure and highly skilled staff. Switzerland’s neutrality, as well as the strong, effective and pragmatic support of our host country are seen as unique and enabling strengths.

Ladies and gentlemen,

The United Nations was formed with the intention to preserve future generations from the scourge of war. Since its creation in 1945, the Peacekeeping and Peacemaking Missions of the UN have been evolving and increasing. Today, as we celebrate the 70th anniversary of the UN, 125,000 women and men are in active service in 16 peacekeeping missions on four continents. In addition, more than 3,300 personnel are serving in 11 political and peacebuilding missions.

After the end of the cold war the number of conflicts was decreasing. During the last four years, developments in Syria, Iraq, Libya and Yemen, the Central African Republic, Mali, Sudan, as well as in Ukraine, give the impression of a reversal of those statistics.

According to the IISS armed conflict survey, the number of armed conflicts have in fact decreased by one third between 2008 and 2014 while the number of fatalities has tripled in the same period – from 56,000 to 180,000. Less conflicts, but becoming more deadly.

At the same time, figures of the Geneva Declaration show that of 508,000 violent deaths per year, only 70,000 or 14 %, were directly related to armed conflict. After Syria, the countries with the highest numbers of violent deaths are Honduras and Venezuela (2012).

Labels such as internal, inter-state, regional, sectarian etc. have become less relevant or accurate. Instead, transnational forces of violent extremism and organized crime combined with terrorism have come to the fore. Internal and external factors are no longer easily separable; they overlap and reinforce each other. The question is not anymore only about armed conflict, it is about conflict more generally.

Technology has allowed new ways of aggression. Cyber wars have brought important institutions to their knees bypassing conventional defence mechanisms. Social media have served as platforms to spread hate and division. At the same time they also provide important tools for participatory governance. With 7 billion mobile phone subscriptions, more individuals have easy access to information. How will these newly empowered voices be taken into account by decision makers? What will be the consequences if they are ignored?

New causes of conflict are emerging. Conflicts over dwindling resources and environmental degradation, such as lack of access to water, climate change, pollution, disasters – all have become potential drivers of displacement and violence.

In 2050 75% of the world population will be living in cities. While urbanization can bring new economic opportunities, cities can also be sites of heightened interpersonal and collective violence. The likelihood of deterioration of peace as a consequence of urbanisation will be greater in countries with weak rule of law, high levels of inequality and therefore high levels of intergroup grievances. This will require a serious rethinking of how we collectively conduct the business of peace.

Today we have a better intellectual understanding of the complex links and interdependencies that cause conflicts and therefore also of the complexity of the solutions. However, our institutional structures and tools – put in place when the UN was first created in 1945 – have not followed suit.

To respond to this new complexity we have to bring the international construct, including the security architecture into the 21st century. To start with, we need a reformed Security Council and a deep reconfiguration of the overall international architecture – the UN family and its multitude of partners – that will maximise thir undeniable experience, expertise and high quality human capital into a better targeted, focused and impactful set of tools. For that to happen we will need much greater political will and engagement from all Member States.

Two recent reviews have pinpointed important elements of our future responses to these needs: the Report of the High-Level Panel on United Nations Peace Operations and the Report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture.

The two reviews focus on the pursuit of more long-term strategies. Undue haste and narrow focus on cessation of hostilities rather than addressing root causes are significant factors of relapse into conflict. Too often, peace accords and elections are rushed, without ensuring local ownership and therefore sustainability. Prevention, mediation and Peacemaking need to be followed by a post-conflict process of sustaining peace. According to a World Bank study, the peaceful future of a country is decided in the first seven years after the end of a conflict. The situation today in South Sudan is a case in point, illustrating that we still do not pay enough attention to the complex issue of sustaining peace after the end of conflict.

We also have to be more inclusive in the planning and implementation of our activities. No United Nations mission will have the desired impact, economically, politically or militarily, when it does not ensure the support of the local population. The international community must really learn to enable, not impose, peace.

Therefore, cookie-cutter solutions will no longer do. Peace operations have to be better tailored to specific situations.

The challenges we face today are too complex to be addressed by any one organization alone. At the global and regional level we have to strengthen partnerships, within the UN family, with regional organisations and other partners, including civil society, to achieve a better coordinated analysis and response. I believe that regional organizations will play a more important role in the future and we have to strengthen our collaboration with them.

We have to do better at integrating women into peace-making and peace-building processes. Fifteen years ago the Security Council adopted Resolution 1325 which calls for equal participation of women in the efforts of maintaining peace. I welcome the work done in this area by swisspeace, supporting the realization of National Action Plans for implementing Resolution 1325. Globally however, we still have a lot of work to do. Gender disparity continues at international and national levels – also in peacekeeping missions and we have a collective responsibility to do much better.

We also need even greater integration of human rights in our activities. Here too swisspeace has been making important contributions with its work on preventing human rights violations through businesses. Human rights are an integral component of every UN mission. At present, six special and political missions have a special human rights monitoring mandate, many others are engaged in activities such as capacity building and support to national authorities in the implementation of human rights norms and standards. The Secretary-General’s Human Rights Up Front initiative has been able to link up the organization’s political, development and human rights work in order to enhance capacity to identify signs of serious human rights abuses and potential conflict, thereby enabling more effective prevention. We need to get better at similarly integrating disparate efforts in our system in economic and social fields into better integrated analysis, and therefore better targeted responses, to all root causes of potential conflicts.

Prevention has to become the first priority. The United Nations has made progress in prevention by strengthening the good offices of the Secretary-General, the work of its envoys, regional offices, United Nations country teams and the professionalization of prevention and mediation services at Headquarters. At the rhetorical level, there is strong support for early warning and conflict prevention but this has to be translated into political support and early action. It is proven that the Security Council’s early engagement and unity can achieve significant results in terms of prevention, but this is still an exception to the rule when it does happen.

The Institute for Economics and Peace [that developed the Global Peace Index] also underlines prevention and has developed a “Positive Peace” framework. It suggests that eight elements are conducive to peace. These include acceptance of the rights of others alongside well-functioning government, equitable distribution of resources, free flow of information, good relations with neighbours, high levels of human capital, low levels of corruption and a sound business environment. These factors have been found to be correlated with capacity for resilience and non-violent conflict resolution. In their interaction they can reinforce each other in a virtuous cycle of peace.

The elements of the “Positive Peace” concept are closely correlated with the priorities of the new sustainable development agenda – economic growth and employment, environmental sustainability, greater food security, gender empowerment, access to water and energy, etc.. Countries scoring high on the Positive Peace Index progressed further in achieving the Millennium Development Goals that preceded the new SDG framework.

But climate change and further deterioration of the environment will still be major drivers of conflicts.

Poverty and inequality are also important drivers of conflict.

The trust deficit we are currently experiencing at national and international levels is a serious threat to peace and stability. Rules are breached with impunity. That engenders a deep feeling of injustice and inequity. The trust deficit needs to be addressed urgently as it seriously undermines our actions in very field of intervention.

The 2030 agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals recently adopted in New York integrate all these elements. We have to see peace and security, development and human rights as one. Achieving the SDGs will give us a much greater chance at also achieving peace. The goals are certainly challenging, but they are achievable.

The SDGs acknowledge the interconnectedness of today’s challenges. To achieve them we have to find new ways of operating. Cross-cutting challenges and solutions require different ways of functioning. We have to adjust the national and international structures of cooperation to the new complex challenges. Member States will not be the only decisive actors in future; there will be a multitude of stakeholders. Given the new interconnectedness we need a new generation of multiple partnerships that allow us to go from superficial consultation of non-state actors towards including them better at the decision taking table.

I firmly believe that a world in Peace is possible. I am strongly encouraged by the great commitment I see around me. In Geneva alone a recent mapping shows that at least 59 organizations are working on peace or peace-related issues. When they cooperate and form transversal partnerships with the other actors engaged in development and human rights, they have a much improved impact. In fact, a majority of agencies that will be working on implementing the Sustainable Development Goals that provide an integrated framework for all these aspects, are based in Geneva. The city is a unique place where it is possible to find solutions for prevention and responses that connects different actors.

We need new ideas to bring our peace efforts into line with today’s realities. The two reviews on peace operations and peacebuilding architecture provide one starting point. But that is not enough. We need to strengthen cross-pollination between operational actors and academic thinkers and researchers like yourselves. A sustained dialogue on how operational needs and academic research can enrich, focus and strengthen each other is an imperative if we are to translate research findings into strategies that work in practice, providing innovative ideas and out of the box strategies. Solid analysis and innovative ideas must guide our way during the next 15 years and beyond.

I thank you and I look forward to the discussion.