H.E. Ambassador Desra Percaya
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Indonesia
to the United Nations
Security Council Open Debate
“Peacekeeping operations: new trends”
New York, June 11, 2014
Thank you for convening this important and timely open debate on new trends of UN peacekeeping operations, and we appreciate your well-rounded and realistic concept-paper.
We also thank the Secretary-General for his briefing.
Indonesia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the distinguished representative of Egypt on behalf of Non-Aligned Movement.
Over the years, indeed, the UN peacekeeping has been evolving to meet the changing and multi-dimensional demands of different conflicts.
Indonesia concurs with your concept note that this evolution poses significant and higher security threats for blue helmets and civilian staff, when they need to undertake wide variety of complex tasks.
It is therefore crucial that the increased demands on UN peacekeeping correspond with adequate capabilities and resources, and these demands be fully consistent with the agreed principles, guidelines and terminology governing peacekeeping.
As the peacekeeping operations continue to evolve both conceptually and operationally, my delegation emphasizes that the three basic UN peacekeeping principles are indispensable.
While innovation and flexibility within reasonable and safe parameters are needed to cope with the operations’ multi-dimensional tasks, the adherence to the basic principles will maintain support, legitimacy and credibility of UN peacekeeping missions, which ultimately pave the way for their success.
Nothing must be done to impinge on this very precious legitimacy and credibility of the UN, which has been hard earned through many decades.
It is in this context that we see the need to have a clear distinction between peacekeeping and peace enforcement, as two completely different things.
The Security Council’s establishment of UN peacekeeping operations should not be used to enable interventions in other countries and impose the interests of some countries.
The expansion of a mission’s mandate and its ambit on the use of force in the absence of a carefully laid out and adequately-supported comprehensive plan, constituting a credible political process, consultation and coordination, will risk the mission’s impartiality along with its peacekeepers’ safety and security.
There is a need, in this regard, to outline an unambiguous and transparent description of “robust” UN peacekeeping operations.
The development of concepts, policies and strategies should be an inter-governmental process, and we must be mindful of the C-34 central role to comprehensively review the various aspects of UN peacekeeping and give its recommendations on them.
Thus the Secretariat should refrain from developing policies or guidelines on peacekeeping without those being discussed inter-governmentally.
While the peacekeeping secretariat needs clear and timely guidance from Member States too, it should enhance its valuable work to improve capacities, planning, oversight and backstopping to the missions.
We believe that the Secretariat can play a greater role to also enable more meaningful interaction among the Troop and Police Contributing Countries, host Countries, itself and the Security Council. This is especially important when the missions’ mandates are being formulated in the early stages or when they are modified subsequently.
We call on the Security Council to engage more frequently and substantively with all peacekeeping stakeholders throughout all phases of a peacekeeping mission and reflect the different concerns and expectations appropriately so that the missions are more effective.
The use of modern technology as part of the new trends also needs to be discussed openly and transparently.
While the new technology can improve situational awareness and help to enhance peacekeepers’ safety and security, we should be mindful that its use, including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), should be considered on a case-by-case basis and it should be in keeping with the basic principles of the UN Charter as well as UN peacekeeping.
Moreover, the use and information gathering of UAVs with their legal, technical and financial aspects should be examined and approved by all relevant actors.
Meanwhile, in the context of deploying the Force Intervention Brigade (FIB) in MONUSCO, we should also carefully guide the discussion, without creating precedence, as it was agreed on an exceptional consideration.
Before concluding, we would like to support the call for the increase in reimbursement rates of troop cost, daily allowance, mission factors and COE on the basis of actual expenses and investments by Troop and Police Contributing Countries.
Finally Mr. President,
Indonesia with its current participation in eight UN peacekeeping missions will continue to strongly support and contribute in the UN efforts to lay down the foundations for stable international peace.
We underscore again the significance of a holistic, properly supported, consultative and coordinated approach to fostering peace and stability. For sustainable outcomes, the inter-linkage between peacekeeping, peacebuilding and development should be seamless, nationally owned and fully supported by all relevant actors.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Permanent Mission of the Republic of Indonesia to the United Nations, New York
325 East 38th Street, New York, NY, 10016, USA
Tel: 1.212.972.8333, Fax: 1.212.972.9780 - www.indonesiamission-ny.org