10 March 2008

GPPi contributes to discussion on the Peacebuilding Commission

GPPi Associate Director Thorsten Benner contributed to a panel discussion taking stock of the work of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) that was formed as a result of the 2005 UN World Summit. The discussion, organized by the Development and Peace Foundation in cooperation with the Ressortkreis Zivile Krisenprävention, took place at the German Foreign Office on 7 March 2008.

Thorsten Benner argued that the Peacebuilding Commission had clearly won the competition against the other institutional innovation which emerged from the 2005 Summit, the Human Rights Council. Yet given the abysmal failure that is the Human Rights Council this in itself cannot be interpreted as a substantial achievement. Therefore, the Peacebuilding Commission should be measured according to its own stated goals. Benner argued it is important to remember that when creating the PBC the member states failed to go along with the ambitious blueprint offered by the 2004 Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change. The panel advocated the creation of the PBC to fill a key institutional gap in the UN system: a body “designed to avoid state collapse and the slide to war or to assist countries in their transition from war to peace.” The early warning function was scrapped due to pressure primarily from the G-77 countries. Yet, the PBC seeks to perform four ambitious tasks: extending the attention span, mobilizing resources, coordinating all players for a coherent approach and distilling best practices and lessons for post-conflict peacebuilding. Benner stated that the PBC did well with regard to the first two tasks. It managed to increase the attention span and mobilize resources for two countries that have been the subject of the PBC: Burundi and Sierra Leone. Benner asserted that taking care of “aid orphans” such as in Burundi (countries that have very few donors and few champions in the donor community) is where the PBC can provide real value added. However, Benner was sceptical with regard to the tasks of building coherence and drawing lessons learned. Here the PBC was much less effective. Without a proper analytical capacity, an intergovernmental body such as the PBC is hard pressed to distil best practices and lessons. He suggested this would be tantamount to asking the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank to come up with best practices on development – without being fed by the vast knowledge infrastructure that is the World Bank (and which the PBC lacks).

Addressing the panel’s question ”PBC – a paper tiger or a functioning organization?“ Benner argued that the verdict is still out as to what route the PBC will go down. The negative scenario of the PBC following the path of the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)  - that is becoming a zombie body where member states continue to send delegates yet makes no difference whatsoever to the lives of  people in need on the ground - is a distinct possibility. In a more optimistic scenario member states can help the PBC find its niche as taking care of the “orphan countries” that otherwise get little attention and have few donors.

The other panellists included Dr. Peter Wittig, Head of the UN unit in the German Foreign Office and Dr. Rudolf Fetzer, Head of UN affairs at the German Ministry for Development and Cooperation. The event was opened by Gernot Erler, Assistant Secretary of State in the German Foreign Office and Carolyn McAskie, UN Assistant Secretary General and head of the Peacebuilding Support Office.

For further information, please contact Thorsten Benner

To view the program, please click here.

Back to: News Archive