General Assembly Security Council

 

Mr. President,


1.    I congratulate you and the other new members who have joined the Council this month. I also thank the Secretary General for outlining his vision and ideas for furthering Conflict Prevention and Sustaining Peace in his maiden address to the Council.


Mr. President,


2.    Today's agenda relates to one of the first purposes of the UN's charter and one which is listed in the first article. We are, therefore, grateful to the delegation of Sweden for proactively initiating this debate and preparing the useful concept paper.


3.    The wisdom of the age old adage, 'Prevention is better than Cure' is self-evident. At the United Nations, your compatriot Dag Hammarskjold is said to have first introduced the term 'preventive diplomacy' more than 50 years ago into the lexicon. Boutros Boutros-Ghali's 'Agenda for Peace' unveiled in the 1990s comes to mind as another milestone in this saga. Yet, efforts at prevention have failed to take firm institutional roots. It, therefore, raises the question - why have we not got it right? Is it because we do not have the right tools? Or is it that we are using the right tools in the wrong way? It is from this perspective we offer our views.


Mr. President,


4. First, India believes that for the UN to develop a culture of conflict prevention, it needs to recognize that the primary responsibility for sustaining peace lies with Member States. The UN can supplement what are essentially home-grown processes. The emphasis on analytical instruments and tools such as fact finding, agenda setting, diplomatic initiatives, peace operations is important but is too narrow an approach. These efforts can at best supplement the roles and situation of the Member State/States concerned. Yet, we provide too few resources to strengthen institutional inadequacies of Member States and instead focus on strengthening institutional arrangements of the UN.


5.    Second, prevention efforts can only be effective, if they are undertaken with the consent and cooperation of the Member State/States concerned and not seen as an imposition. After all, these efforts are aimed at helping the Member State/States concerned and assisting them on what can be done and how it can be done. As the saying goes 'you cannot shake hands with a clenched fist.'
 

6.    Third, we need to remember that while the mandate provided in the UN Charter is vast, the UN cannot do all by itself. There can be and are actors at local, national, sub-regional and regional levels that may be in a better position to do so and can manage these issues better. The UN needs to recognize and act taking the diversity of situations and availability of instrumentalities.


7.    Fourth, talk of promoting sustainable peace and preventing conflicts will cut little ice if there are no resources to back it. The 'Sustaining Peace' resolutions adopted by the General Assembly and the Security Council last year did not lead to agreement even on allocation of 1 /o of the peacekeeping budget to those activities. Are we ready to change that mindset?


8.    Fifth, the established international order is being upended in terms of economic, political and technological shifts. Even long-established States are unable to fully respond to the new factors and forces being unleashed. History teaches us that ungoverned swathes often become grounds for competition or are storehouses for germination of new threats. Yet, we have no global governance architecture in frontier areas such as cyber, space and oceans. We ignore these at our own peril.


9.    Sixth, while the world is changing, the institutional architecture primarily responsible for areas of peace and security remains frozen. The Security Council which takes decisions on behalf of 'we the people' represents an increasingly small minority of the world's population. If it is to make rules for 'the people' then it needs to adequately reflect new realities. Addressing new issues, threats and challenges of the twenty first century needs an updated, not an outdated instrument. A Security Council which has lost its legitimacy cannot be an effective tool to address the challenges of conflict prevention and sustaining peace.


Mr. President,


10.    Putting the sustaining peace agenda on a firm footing needs a coherent and comprehensive strategy. I thank you for organizing this debate as a contribution to that noble objective.