DOCSLIB.ORG

2020 Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture – “Financing and Partnerships for Peacebuilding and Sustaining Peace”, 15 June 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020 Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture – “Financing and Partnerships for Peacebuilding and Sustaining Peace”, 15 June 2020 Norway Written Statement, Ambassadorial-Level Consultation of the Peacebuilding Commission – 2020 Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture – “Financing and Partnerships for Peacebuilding and Sustaining Peace”, 15 June 2020. Norway believes in a strong multilateral system with the UN at its centre. The United Nations, with its unique mandate for peace and security, development and human rights, must improve its ability to work across all pillars. Addressing systematic human rights violations at an early stage can prevent escalation of violence and conflict. And create a starting point for peaceful and sustainable development. We also need strong partnerships with other international and regional actors, including but not limited to the African Union and sub-regional organizations. The Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review of the UN’s operational activities reaffirms the links between peace and development. Norway would like to see the UN’s activities in crisis-affected countries moving in the direction of “one country – one UN framework” with common objectives, strategic planning and clear distribution of responsibilities. In order to be sustainable, development and peace must be inclusive. Inclusion is about gender, it is about age, culture, ethnicity, language and religion. It is about recognising the equal rights and dignity of all human beings. Inclusion broadens the base, removes our blind spots, and gives us a stronger foundation on which to build the society we want. National ownership and leadership is necessary” for development and poverty eradication in any country. This, of course, is also true for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. The role of the UN is to support member states in achieving the SDGs. The litmus test for successful UN reform is a UN that delivers as one at country level, in a results-oriented, coherent, integrated, efficient and effective manner. Peacebuilding, development and humanitarian actors must pull in the same direction in conflict-affected countries. The three reforms decided by Member States pave the way for a major shift in how the UN operates, but a lot of hard work remains. It requires that all – UN entities and Members States – do their part. Changes in culture and behaviour are prerequisites. The new resident coordinator system constitutes the core of the reform of the UN development system. Sufficient funding is a critical issue. While the entities in the UN system live up to their funding obligations, only a limited number of Member States provide voluntary funding to the RC-system. All Member States are encouraged to take part in the burden sharing. However, the UN also needs to adapt to regional challenges and cross-border operations as is the case in the complex environment of the Sahel region, Syria and other crisis of a regional character. The Peacebuilding Fund’s increased focus on cross-border projects is a positive and necessary development in this regard. More effective and comprehensive UN efforts on the ground in states ridden by or emerging from conflict, in line with the 2016 resolutions, are necessary to deliver on the SDGs. It is directly connected to the three reform strands initiated by the Secretary General and adopted by member states. The Peacebuilding Commission has been vitalized following the 2015 review, and we look forward to continuing this trend through the 2020 review. The Peacebuilding Commission has a unique platform and convening power to put peacebuilding on the international agenda. The Peacebuilding Fund is leading the way, and deserves every possible praise for its efficiency and willingness to innovate. While humanitarian action and peacekeeping operations are welcome and necessary, more funding should be channeled towards prevention. The PBF cannot shoulder this burden on its own. The role of the PBF is to be catalytic, not to be the main vehicle to solve every aspect of peacebuilding. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that other more substantial and long term funding is provided in order to take advantage of the windows of opportunity created by PBF projects in marginalized communities. The sources of funding to scale-up activities may be governmental, multilateral and bilateral aid and private investment. Norway has provided contributions of more than 88 million USD to the PBF since the launch of the fund. Norway is about to enter into a new five year agreement for the next strategic phase of the PBF (2020-24) for 500 million NOK (approximately USD 52 million) Norway welcomes the World Bank’s increased engagement in fragile states. All multilateral institutions, and the private sector, need to work together to mobilize resources. Adequate financing is key to consolidate peace. Increased joint assessments, planning and monitoring between the UN and International Financial Institutions are an important innovation that should be expanded upon and institutionalized. The inclusion of regional organizations such as the AU and the EU in joint assessments and planning and monitoring would further greater coherence. The private sector is a vital component in promoting development and thus lay the groundwork for sustaining peace. However, incentives for investments and a conducive and transparent regulatory framework is necessary in order for the private sector to play this essential role. Civil society plays a vital role in advocacy and service delivery for peace in conflict areas. The inclusion of civil society also at the community level is key for sustaining peace. The international community must utilize all the tools at its disposal to combat the Covid 19 pandemic. The Covid 19 Humanitarian Response Plan and the Covid 19 Response and Recovery Multi-Party Trust Fund are important initiatives to this end, but need more and predictable funding. The PBFs efforts in prevention in terms of combating disinformation about the pandemic and reducing the possibility of the pandemic becoming a new driver of conflict is commendable. The Covid-19 pandemic is an opportunity for the UN development system to prove progress in their ability to work closely together under the leadership of the Resident Coordinator at the country level and to adjust quickly due to changing circumstances. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aspr China's Emergence As a Peacebuilding Actor
    INTRODUCING THE ASPR CHINA'S EMERGENCE AS A RESEARCH AGENDA PEACEBUILDING ACTOR policy brief 1/2018 POLICY BRIEF 4/2018 by Pascal Abb peacekeeping, conflict mediation and infrastructure investment in conflict zones are coordinated and thus part of a genuinely Ever since its announcement in 2013, the Chinese ‘Belt and Road alternative model of peacebuilding. While the currently available Initiative’ (BRI) has attracted significant attention from evidence is far from sufficient to answer this question, it is worth international observers, speculating about its impact on fields posing if only to inform future efforts. ranging from economic integration to geopolitics. However, the peace and security implications of the BRI have seen Expanding activities in conflict settings comparatively little interest, as has China's overall engagement with conflict and post-conflict societies – many of which, like Owing to a lack of conceptual clarity as well as the large number Pakistan, South Sudan and Sri Lanka, are key members of the of involved agencies, many Chinese 'peacebuilding' activities are BRI.1 Due to the enormous volume of Chinese investments now not labelled as such or indeed primarily directed towards this being poured into these countries, China seems poised to gain a aim. Three main strands are important here: peacekeeping, significant stake in ongoing peace processes and other conflict mediation, and economic investments, especially in settlement efforts. This will crucially affect their post-conflict infrastructure. The latter also capture profit-oriented reconstruction and economic development. While the existence investments rather than pure aid projects, which may seem at of economic interests is not the sole explanation for deeper odds with a traditional peacebuilding portfolio.
    [Show full text]
  • A Roadmap for the 2020 Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture
    A roadmap for the 2020 review of the peacebuilding architecture Chair’s Summary 6th Peacebuilding Commission Retreat organized by the Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation in collaboration with the UN Peacebuilding Support Office 15-16-October 2019, Greentree Estate, Manhasset, NY The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation and the Peacebuilding Support Office (PBSO) co-led a retreat of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) intended to serve as an informal exchange on core thematic areas to be addressed in the forthcoming review of the Peacebuilding Architecture mandated by resolutions A/RES/70/262 and S/RES/2282 (2016) (hereinafter referred to as “the 2016 resolutions on the review of the peacebuilding architecture”). The retreat opened with a reception and welcome dinner during which the Secretary-General shared key reflections on peacebuilding and sustaining peace and the forthcoming review, emphasising its importance for the full UN system and all reform efforts. In addition to the Secretary-General, the Presidents of the General Assembly, Security Council and ECOSOC, Permanent Representatives/Ambassadors from the membership of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC), Under Secretaries-General of the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs and the Department of Peace Operations, as well as Assistant Secretaries-General of other lead UN entities engaged in peacebuilding participated in the event. Building on the experiences of 2010 and 2015, the purpose of the retreat was to give Member States an opportunity to identify critical themes and issues to shape the 2020 review, based on a shared understanding of the expectations and modalities outlined in the agreed Terms of Reference; and to explore practical ways for the PBC to build on its previous efforts in fulfilment of its advisory role to the General Assembly and the Security Council, including by convening discussions during the informal phase of the review.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue Brief: Perspectives on the Peacebuilding Commission's
    Issue Brief: Perspectives on the Peacebuilding Commission’s Coordination Role NOVEMBER 2009 This issue brief was prepared by The founding resolutions of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) (A/60/180, Jenna Slotin, Senior Program S/Res/1645) call for a review in 2010. As member states gear up for this review, IPI has prepared issue briefs to offer perspectives on aspects of the PBC’s role. Officer, as part of IPI’s work on While there are several procedural issues that member states will want to address, peacebuilding and state fragility. this review offers an opportunity to reflect more broadly on the role of the PBC. This work is generously supported These briefs are offered in that spirit. They are not intended to cover all aspects by the Carnegie Corporation of New of the PBC’s role, but rather to offer food for thought on some elements of the York. It also fits within IPI’s umbrella PBC’s comparative advantage. program, Coping with Crisis, The founding resolutions of the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) state that Conflict, and Change , which is one of the main purposes of the commission is “to improve the coordination generously supported by the of all relevant actors within and outside the United Nations.” What does this governments of Denmark, Finland, mean for an intergovernmental advisory organ? Can the PBC really be Greece, Luxembourg, the expected to coordinate the many UN agencies, funds, and programs on the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, ground, let alone the many bilateral, multilateral, and nongovernmental actors Sweden, Switzerland, and the that are present in a postconflict country? What does the PBC have to offer United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward Coordinated Responses to Conflict: Perspectives on United Nations Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, and Peacebuilding
    Toward Coordinated Responses to Conflict: Perspectives on United Nations Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, and Peacebuilding Beijing Foreign Studies University Beijing, China May 13–14, 2013 Summary Note of Proceedings Introduction On 13 and 14 May 2013, the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), the Social Science Research Council (SSRC), and the Quaker United Nations Office (QUNO) in partnership with the Beijing Foreign Studies University held a two- day conference titled Towards Coordinated Responses to Conflict: Perspectives on United Nations Peacemaking, Peacekeeping, and Peacebuilding at the Beijing Foreign Studies University (BFSU). The conference commenced with a public plenary session which led into a series of closed discussion panels focused on United Nations peacebuilding architecture. Roughly forty individuals from Europe, China, the Global South, South East Asia, and the United States participated in the two-day event. Plenary Session The plenary session featured, first, a speech by Ms. Liu Hua, deputy director- general of the United Nations Association of China (UNA-China) and former counselor at the Permanent Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations in Geneva. Liu Hua emphasized the tremendous shift that has taken place over the past three decades in the nature of conflict around the globe. She recalled that during the Cold War most conflict was international in nature, now it is rarely so, happening instead in places where the state is weak or nonexistent. In response to this change, the UN must adhere to the principles of the Charter by focusing more of its energies on conflict prevention. In the keynote speech that followed, James Jonah, the former undersecretary of the Department of Political Affairs of the United Nations, reflected on the history of UN involvement in peace operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Does the UN Peacebuilding Commission Change the Mode of Peacebuilding in Africa?
    Does the UN Peacebuilding Commission Change the Mode of Peacebuilding in Africa? pbsbofkb=jK=ordrj^jr= UN Peacebuilding Commission in Africa FES Briefing Paper 8 | June 2009 2 countries to reverting to conflict, the UN ac- 1 Introduction knowledged publicly that it regularly failed to In December 2005, the United Nations created a prevent such recurrences and to establish func- high-profile Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) to tioning, responsive and inclusive political institu- serve as a dedicated institutional mechanism to tions in war-torn societies.1 It further acknowl- fill the gap in the international architecture for edged that the short timeframes, limited man- post-conflict response. As such the PBC was dates, financial and personnel resources, and mandated to link the political, security and eco- equipment provided often tended to grossly un- nomic functions of the United Nations in conflict derestimate what was required to achieve dura- and post-conflict situations. This paper analyzes ble peace and development. the PBC’s own integrated strategies for peace- The problems of coordination exists on four in- building in Sierra Leone and Burundi, through ter-related levels: first, at the field level between cumulative performance reports and views of the various international actors including gov- practitioners. ernmental and non-governmental agencies in- 2 Post Cold War Peacebuilding volved in peacebuilding missions and domestic actors within the country itself. Second, within In almost all previous and on-going peacekeep- bureaucracies of major donor governments, ing and peacebuilding operations, the UN has whose different departments and agencies often been represented by the Department of Peace- pursue different goals and activities within the keeping Operations, the United Nations Devel- same mission.
    [Show full text]
  • Peacebuilding
    Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 01:29 24 May 2016 Peacebuilding The creation of the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) in 2005 was the culmination of a long and contentious process. In this book Rob Jenkins provides a concise introduction that traces the origins and evolution of peacebuilding as a concept, the establishment and func- tioning of the PBC as an institution, and the complicated relationship between these two processes. Jenkins examines how continued contestation over what exactly peace- building is, and how its objectives could most effectively be achieved, influenced the institutional design of the UN’snew“peacebuilding archi- tecture.” He then analyzes the roles that the organizations which com- prise this new architecture have carved out for themselves during their first years in existence. The book argues that the UN’sapproachtorebuild- ing war-torn states will continue to be profoundly influenced by persis- tent political faultlines between member states as well as institutional rivalries within the UN’s sprawling bureaucracy. The theory and practice of peacebuilding have assumed increasing importance over the last decade, and this work is essential reading for all students of conflict resolution, peace studies, and international relations. Rob Jenkins is Professor of Political Science at Hunter College and the Graduate Center at The City University of New York. Formerly Pro- fessor of Politics at the University of London, he has published widely Downloaded by [University of Defence] at 01:29 24 May 2016 on Indian politics, movements for democratic accountability, and the politics of international economic and security assistance. Routledge Global Institutions Series Edited by Thomas G.
    [Show full text]
  • PBC- a Commission for Hegemonic Peace Building?
    Vol. 8(8), pp. 244-253, November 2014 DOI: 10.5897/AJPSIR2014.0663 Article Number: 3810DA547792 African Journal of Political Science and ISSN 1996-0832 Copyright © 2014 International Relations Author(s) retain the copyright of this article http://www.academicjournals.org/AJPSIR Review PBC- A commission for hegemonic peace building? Keorapetse Mmoloki Gabatlhaolwe Xiamen University, School of International Relations, Xiamen, China, P.R. Received 6 January, 2014; Accepted 19 September, 2014 The United Nations’ (UN) organ, the Peace-building Architecture (PBA) directed by Peace-building Commission (PBC) is yet to become a distinct player in peace-building. Arguments articulate well how it continues to find it difficult to tackle challenges that mar world wide support for peace-building. It seems to display behaviours that are assumed in the modernization theory and has a vague approach to the concept of peace-building. According to the North Countries it can mean development, security or organizing elections while to the South Countries it means literally negotiating for peace. However, the PBC has excelled in securing resources for quick impact projects that delivered immediate key dividends of peace to traumatised war victims. All countries on the Commission’s agenda have so far received funding through the architecture's PBSO. On the same note, It is the worry of this study that the PBC focuses exclusively on financing or rebuilding states and the fear of this author is that the PBC has just become another donor forum (‘burden sharing enterprise' as this author prefers to call it), by former colonizers. This research finds out how the PBC and the PBSO add to the use of institutions to formalize power, thus making peace-building a very hegemonic and political enterprise.
    [Show full text]
  • Membership of the Peacebuilding Commission 2018
    Membership of the Peacebuilding Commission 2018 • Seven members elected by the General Assembly Colombia, Czech Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Kenya, Indonesia, Mexico • Seven members selected by the Security Council Bolivia, China, Cote d’Ivoire, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States • Seven members elected by the Economic and Social Council Belgium, Ecuador, Italy, Nigeria, Republic of Korea, Romania South Africa • Five top providers of military personnel and civilian police to United Nations missions Bangladesh, Ethiopia, India, Pakistan, Rwanda • Five the top providers of assessed contributions to United Nations budgets and of voluntary contributions to the United Nations funds, programmes and agencies, including a standing peacebuilding fund Brazil, Canada, Germany, Japan, Norway Participants in all meetings of the Peacebuilding Commission (in accordance with paragraph 9 of General Assembly resolution 60/180 and Security Council resolution 1645 (2005)) European Union, International Monetary Fund, Organization of Islamic Cooperation, World Bank Additional members of the Burundi configuration (in accordance with paragraph 7 of General Assembly resolution 60/180 and Security Council resolution 1645 (2005)) Australia Burundi Comoros Democratic Republic of the Congo Sweden Switzerland Turkey Uganda United Republic of Tanzania African Development Bank African Union East African Economic Community Economic Commission for Africa Economic Community of Central African States European Union Executive Representative of the Secretary-General
    [Show full text]
  • Report of the AGE on the 2015 Peacebuilding Review FINAL
    United Nations Nations Unies HEADQUARTERS • SIEGE NEW YORK, NY 10017 TEL.: 1 (212) 963.1234 • FAX: 1 (212) 963.4879 Letter dated 29 June 2015 from the Chair of the Secretary-General’s Advisory Group of Experts on the 2015 Review of the United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture addressed to the Presidents of the Security Council and of the General Assembly I have the honour to refer to the letter dated 15 December 2014 and addressed to the Secretary-General from the Presidents of the General Assembly and the Security Council, in which the two presidents, following consultations with Member States undertaken by their respective offices, jointly proposed terms of reference for the 2015 review of the United Nations peacebuilding architecture. As you know, this comprehensive review consists of two stages. In the first, the Secretary-General designated an Advisory Group of seven experts to prepare a review report. In the second, an inter-governmental process will examine that report and take pertinent actions. On 22 January 2015, the Secretary-General appointed the following members of the Advisory Group: Anis Bajwa (Pakistan), Saraswathi Menon (India), Funmi Olonisakin (Nigeria), Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah (Mauritania), Charles Petrie (France), Gert Rosenthal (Guatemala), and Edith Grace Ssempala (Uganda). As Chair of the Advisory Group, and on behalf of all its members, I am pleased to inform you that we have concluded our work within the stipulated timeframe and in strict compliance with the terms of reference. The Advisory Group engaged in wide consultations and discussions, analysed abundant background documents, and conducted five case studies – Burundi, the Central African Republic, Sierra Leone, South Sudan and Timor-Leste – to motivate its recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • UN Peacebuilding Commission
    UN 75 POLICY BRIEF NO. 3 | NOVEMBER 2019 UN Photo/CCOI Photo: Photo: Upgrading the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission into an empowered Council RECOMMENDATION: Create a strong UN Peacebuilding Council to replace the current Peacebuilding Commission. Similar to the transformation of the Human Rights Commission into a Council in 2006, it is time for the UN Peacebuilding Commission to be upgraded into a Council with enhanced powers and responsibilities, and mandated to lead on policy development, coor- dination, resource mobilization, conflict prevention, and peacebuilding efforts not addressed directly by the Security Council. Global Challenge Update: Over Since 2011, the UN Security Innovation Proposal: Facing dif- the past ten years, the world has Council’s permanent members ficulties in improving Security become less peaceful.1 Moreover, have cast thirteen vetoes to block Council representativeness and the gap between the most peace- action on the Syrian conflict. In effectiveness, an empowered ful and least peaceful countries contrast, the UN Peacebuilding Peacebuilding Council would al- has increased between 2008-2019 Commission has made some im- low a greater number of capable (see figure below). Violent conflict portant strides, including through UN Member States to contribute is the main driver of humanitarian innovating various engagements directly to the UN’s primary pur- needs, with projections showing with countries emerging from pose of maintaining international conflict and a flexible and stream- peace and security. By replacing that, in 2019 alone, nearly 132 mil- lined “integrated peacebuilding the all-but-defunct Trusteeship lion people will require humanitar- 2 strategy” instrument that aims to Council as one of the six major ian assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • UN Peacebuilding
    WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED TO SAVE SUCCEEDING GENERATIONS FROM THE SCOURGE OF WAR, WHICH TWICE IN OUR LIFETIME HAS BROUGHT UNTOLD SORROW TO MANKIND, AND TO REAFFIRM FAITH IN FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS, IN THE DIGNITY AND WORTH OF THE HUMAN PERSON, IN THE EQUAL RIGHTS OF MEN AND WOMEN AND OF NATIONS LARGE AND SMALL, AND TO ESTABLISH CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH JUSTICE AND RESPECT FOR THE OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM TREATIES AND OTHER SOURCES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW CAN BE MAINTAINED, AND TO PROMOTE SOCIAL PROGRESS AND BETTER STANDARDS OF LIFE IN LARGER FREEDOM, AND FOR THESE ENDS TO PRACTICE TOLERANCE AND LIVE TOGETHER IN PEACE WITH ONE ANOTHER AS GOOD NEIGHBOURS, AND TO UNITE OUR STRENGTH TO MAINTAIN INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY, AND TO ENSURE, BY THE ACCEPTANCE OF PRINCIPLES AND THE INSTITUTION OF METHODS, THAT ARMED FORCE SHALL NOT BE USED, SAVE IN THE COMMON INTEREST, AND TO EMPLOY INTERNATIONAL MACHINERY FOR THE PROMOTION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL ADVANCEMENT OF ALL PEOPLES, HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS. UN Peacebuilding: an Orientation WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED TO SAVE SUCCEEDING GENERATIONS FROM THE SCOURGE OF WAR, WHICH TWICE IN OUR LIFETIME HAS BROUGHT UNTOLD SORROW TO MAN- KIND, AND TO REAFFIRM FAITH IN FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHTS, IN THE DIGNITY AND WORTH OF THE HUMAN PERSON, IN THE EQUAL RIGHTS OF MEN AND WOMEN AND OF NATIONS LARGE AND SMALL, AND TO ESTABLISH CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH JUSTICE AND RE- SPECT FOR THE OBLIGATIONS ARISING FROM TREATIES AND OTHER UN Peacebuilding:
    [Show full text]
  • Restructuring the Un Secretariat to Strengthen Preventative Diplomacy and Peace Operations
    RESTRUCTURING THE UN SECRETARIAT TO STRENGTHEN PREVENTATIVE DIPLOMACY AND PEACE OPERATIONS SARAH CLIFFE AND ALEXANDRA NOVOSSELOFF N Y U CENTER ON INTERNATIONAL C I C COOPERATION February 2017 CENTER ON INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION The world faces old and new security challenges that are more complex than our multilateral and national institutions are currently capable of managing. International cooperation is ever more necessary in meeting these challenges. The NYU Center on International Cooperation (CIC) works to enhance international responses to conflict and insecurity through applied research and direct engagement with multilateral institutions and the wider policy community. CIC’s programs and research activities span the spectrum of conflict insecurity issues. This allows us to see critical inter-connections between politics, security, development and human rights and highlight the coherence often necessary for effective response. We have a particular concentration on the UN and multilateral responses to conflict. TABLE OF CONTENTS RESTRUCTURING THE UN SECRETARIAT TO STRENGTHEN PREVENTATIVE DIPLOMACY AND PEACE OPERATIONS By Sarah Cliffe and Alexandra Novosseloff ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ABOUT THE AUTHORS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY iii I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. THE EVOLUTION OF UN SECRETARIAT STRUCTURES IN PEACE AND SECURITY, AND PEACEBUILDING 3 III. CURRENT CHALLENGES 13 IV. FOR A NEW KIND OF LEADERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT 16 V. DIFFERENT MODELS FOR RESTRUCTURING 17 VI. BUDGET, FIDUCIARY PROCEDURES AND HUMAN RESOURCES 27 VII. PRACTICAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 34 ENDNOTES 39 APPENDIX A – THE SECRETARIAT AND THE REST OF THE UN SYSTEM: CONNECTORS ACROSS UN SILOS 42 APPENDIX B – CHRONOLOGY – HISTORY OF UN STRUCTURES IN PEACE AND SECURITY 43 APPENDIX C – DETAILED RESTRUCTURING MODELS 45 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank a number of CIC colleagues for their support in preparing this report.
    [Show full text]