history of un preventive diplomacy essay

UN diplomacy in modern conflict prevention

Alexandra pichler-fong.

Senior Policy Adviser, UNU Centre for Policy Research

UN Political Adviser, Eritrea

Join the Conversation

• Share on mail
• comments added

INTERGOVERNMENTAL RESEARCH AND POLICY JOURNAL

A ‘HIGH-EFFICIENCY FACTOR JOURNAL’

An Open Access Article

Article History at IRPJ

United Nations Preventive Diplomacy: Evolution and Practice

Deryck FRITZ

Author’s Affiliation: (1) School of  Diplomacy and International Affairs, Pôle Universitaire Euclide (Euclid University), Bangui (Central African Republic) and Greater Banjul (Republic of the Gambia) / EUCLID Global Institute, Washington DC (United States)

Email: [email protected]

Corresponding Author:

Pr Devender BHALL, HDR 

Email: [email protected]

Violent conflict can have a devastating impact on individuals, communities and societies. This is evidenced by the destruction wrought by the two world wars, which claimed millions of lives, required billions of dollars for reconstruction of conflict-affected countries, and continues to have a profound physical and psychological impact on the international state system today. The United Nations is the principal international institution that emerged from the second World War, with the enormous responsibility to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” in accordance with the UN Charter. It has made concerted efforts in this regard, in terms of conflict prevention, conflict management and resolution, promoting human rights and fostering development. This paper examines the preventive diplomacy efforts of the UN, in cooperation with other intergovernmental organizations, in view of the increasing and diverse challenges faced by the Organization in today’s complex and interdependent world.

1. Introduction

There is an old saying that prevention is better than cure. Nowhere perhaps is this more pertinent than in the case of international peace and security. Violent conflict can have a devastating impact on individuals, communities and societies. This is evidenced by the destruction wrought by the two world wars, which claimed millions of lives, required billions of dollars for reconstruction of conflict-affected countries, and continues to have a profound physical and psychological impact on the international state system today.

The United Nations is the principal international institution that emerged from the second World War, with the enormous responsibility to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” in accordance with the UN Charter. It has made concerted efforts in this regard, in terms of conflict prevention, conflict management and resolution, promoting human rights and fostering development. This paper will examine the preventive diplomacy efforts of the UN in the view of the increasing and diverse challenges faced by the Organization in today’s complex and interdependent world.

2.      Background

2.1.  early prevention efforts.

The end of World War II heralded the introduction of a new international architecture for conflict prevention, based on the foundation set out in the UN Charter, and aimed at “reducing the risks of interstate conflict” [1]. Chapter I, Article 1 of the Charter states that the main conflict prevention objectives of the UN are “to maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and . . . to bring about by peaceful means . . . adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace” [2].

Initially, peacekeeping missions were deployed to monitor interstate ceasefires (Israel and Lebanon, 1948; India and Pakistan 1949). However, towards the end of the cold war in the late 1980s and early 1990s, the emphasis shifted towards resolving intrastate conflicts and ending civil wars. The associated approaches included mediation of political settlements, and greater investment in peacekeeping operations to implement the agreements, as in the case of Cambodia and Mozambique. A preventive approach placed a greater emphasis on prevention of further escalation of conflict rather than preventing the outbreak of the conflict in the first place, or addressing its root causes. It was therefore not surprising that in several cases, there was a recurrence of conflict, often with devastating consequences in terms of loss of life, property and livelihoods.

2.2.  The Agenda for Peace

In 1992, there was a renewed focus on the prevention efforts of the UN. The Secretary-General’s report, An Agenda for Peace , presented the following definition of the preventive diplomacy: “action to prevent disputes arising between parties, to prevent existing disputes from escalating into conflicts, and to limit the spread of the latter when they occur” [3]. The report introduced the term “post-conflict peacebuilding,” which was defined as “comprehensive efforts to identify and support structures which will tend to consolidate peace and advance a sense of confidence and well-being among people” [4].

However, the inability of the UN to adequately respond to the conflicts in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia highlighted the ineffectiveness in the prevention capacity of the UN, and in particular of the Security Council. The first comprehensive report by a Secretary-General focused solely on conflict prevention was produced in 2001. This report made the distinction between operational prevention (actions taken in an immediate conflict), and structural prevention (longer-term actions aimed at addressing root causes of conflict) [5]. Later that year, the unfortunate attacks of 9/11 would take place, resulting is a shift of focus of the Security Council from conflict prevention to counter-terrorism.

At the World Summit in 2005, world leaders made a commitment “to promote a culture of prevention of armed conflict as a means of addressing the interconnected security and development challenges faced by peoples throughout the world, as well as to strengthen the capacity of the United Nations for the prevention of armed conflict” [6]. The 2005 World Summit established the Peacebuilding Commission as an “intergovernmental advisory body” [7], supported the Secretary-General’s efforts to strengthen his mediation capacities, and endorsed the concept of the “Responsibility to Protect” [8].

2.3.  Towards Sustaining Peace

Globalization and the increasing interdependence of the world has brought with it a change in the nature and causes of conflict. Today’s conflicts are no longer interstate, but are also intrastate, and do not only involve conventional military forces. The combatants also include non-state actors, who have “transnational goals” [9]. Many of these conflicts also risk spilling over into neighboring countries, and so the internationalization of domestic conflicts is of primary concern.

The international conflict prevention architecture is currently confronted by other “new and complex challenges [that] have arisen since the end of the Cold War that range from terrorism and violent extremism to cybersecurity, from climate change to massive forced displacement, and from global illicit activities to outbreaks of disease” [10]. In August 2007, a presidential statement of the Security Council noted that conflict prevention strategies should incorporate systemic prevention (measures taken to address transnational threats, and “to prevent existing conflicts from spilling over into other States” [11]). The need to address these challenges adequately prompted three reviews of the UN’s peace and security architecture in 2015: the High-Level Panel on Peace Operations (HIPPO); the Advisory Group of Experts (AGE) review of the peacebuilding architecture; and the Global Study on Women, Peace and Security.

Activities aimed at preventing the outbreak, escalation, continuation and recurrence of conflict . . . and should flow through all three pillars of the United Nation’s engagement [peace and security, human rights and sustainable development] at all stages of conflict.

The Global Study on Women, Peace and Security, which looked at both operational and structural causes of conflict, reaffirmed the link between peace and development, and called on the UN to “support women’s engagement . . . in preventive diplomacy efforts” [15]. In 2015, the UN General Assembly also adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which consists of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals. Included among these is Goal 16, which again emphasized sustainable development as a prerequisite for peace and vice versa: Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.

3.      Examples of UN Preventive Diplomacy

3.1.  un in the lead.

UN preventive diplomacy is an aspect of conflict prevention that is a “means to engage with individual actors” and to “influence their strategies in situations at risk of conflict” [16]. UN preventive diplomacy interventions include 1) undertaking good offices; 2) supporting domestic and regional prevention; and 3) international coordination. The good offices activities include engaging with the parties to find peaceful solutions, facilitation of dialogue, and mediation [17].

In Burkina Faso in 2014, following an attempted coup by former members of the presidential against the transitional authorities, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the UN Regional Office for West Africa (UNOWA) together with ECOWAS engaged with the coup leaders to convince them that “they did not enjoy political support.” They also worked with national political actors and civil society organizations to engage in dialogue. These efforts by a UN Special envoy, along with unified messages from the regional political actors and the international community, supported by staff from UN HQ, ensured timely preventive diplomacy intervention. This led to a revised constitution and restored transitional arrangements leading to successful elections in 2015 [18].

In Kyrgyzstan in 2010, the UN Regional Center for Preventive Diplomacy (UNRCCA), and in coordination with the EU, OSCE and the UN Country Team supported the efforts of a UN Special Envoy, who had been sent to address a political and humanitarian crisis there. The conditions of instability were caused by “nationalist, extremist and criminal groups” in the south of the country, as well as by clashes between the most populous ethnic groups, Kyrgyz and Uzbeks [19]. The joint efforts involved “capacity-building . . . facilitating regional dialogues, especially around terrorism, water and energy; and providing aid to displaced Uzbeks” [20]. This allowed for the de-escalation of tensions and the creation of an environment for a reform process and eventual elections.

Within weeks of the protests that claimed several lives in Malawi in 2011, the Secretary General dispatched an Envoy to the Southern African nation. The work of the Envoy, which was supported by analysis provided by the UN Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative on the ground, involved engaging with the Government and civil society to desist from activities that would escalate the conflict. Moreover, both parties were persuaded “to accept a UN-facilitated dialogue,” and the subsequent discussion of the procedural aspects of which were facilitated by the UN Resident Coordinator, until such time as an external facilitator could be identified [21].

3.2.  UN in Support

The UN also plays an important role in support of preventive diplomacy efforts of regional and sub-regional organizations. In the wake of the post-electoral violence and loss of life in Kenya in 2007, the African Union appointed a mediation team to help the parties to find a way out of the conflict. As a member of the technical support team for these talks, I personally witnessed the UN System, both in Nairobi and in New York, heavily supporting the mediation efforts of the AU team through the provision of political and humanitarian analysis, electoral technical advice, as well as financial and material resources. The UN team also coordinated with the technical support teams from the AU and Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue in the provision of secretariat services to the mediation team.

In Yemen in 2011, a youth uprising demanding the resignation of the country’s president turned violent after lethal force was used by the government. This led to an agreement in principle by the President to step down, and a subsequent initiative by the Gulf Cooperation Council to assist the Yemenis in drafting an agreement on the terms of the president’s departure. However, there was no implementation plan for the agreement. The Secretary-General sent a Special Advisor to Yemen, who assessed that “the UN’s added value lay in helping develop an [inclusive] implementation plan” [22]. The Special Advisor coordinated with GCC, keeping the Security Council informed, resulting in the passing of a SC resolution on October 2011 that “urged the parties to comply with the terms of the GCC initiative,” and the implementation plan. Three months later, after the holding of elections, the President finally stepped down, transferring power to his deputy.

4.      UN Preventive Diplomacy Tools

While the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and the International Court of Justice all have important roles in the prevention of conflict, it is the Security Council and Secretariat that bear the brunt of the burden in the UN’s preventive diplomacy. The UN Security Council has several tools at its disposal for taking preventive action, one of which is the visiting Security Council mission. In this regard, all or part of the membership of the Security Council may undertake visits to countries at risk of conflict, for the purposes of “information gathering, support for peace operations and peace processes, conflict mediation and preventive diplomacy” [23].

Article 34 of the UN Charter gives the Security Council the mandate to “investigate any dispute, or any situation which might lead to international friction or give rise to a dispute” [24]. Actions under this mandate include “commissions of inquiry, Council fact-finding missions and the establishment of investigatory subcommittees of the Council” [25]. Another set of tools available to the Council under Article 41 of the Charter are sanctions, which can be applied to influence the behavior of parties in order to prevent armed conflict. The Council also created the Peacebuilding Commission (PBC) and through the twin resolutions on sustaining peace have created a framework for greater engagement between the Council and the PBC.

The UN Secretariat, for its part, employs a diverse range of mechanisms in its conflict prevention toolkit, including special envoys (senior diplomats deployed by the Secretary-General to resolve a diverse array of disputes); special political missions (ensuring sustained preventive efforts in a country, across a range of disciplines); and peacekeeping operations (integrated civilian, police and military operations aimed at providing security, political and peacebuilding support) [26].

Regional offices (platforms for preventive diplomacy, supporting national actors, UN Country Teams, and regional organizations); standby mediation experts (senior mediation practitioners able to deploy at 72 hours’ notice); UN country teams (the UN in-country presence of agencies, funds and programmes); and Resident Coordinators (senior UN officials who coordinate the efforts of the UN Country Team) provide the requisite country-specific and technical expertise that is required to support preventive diplomacy initiatives [27].

Other tools at the disposal of the UN Secretariat include electoral assistance (electoral experts deployed to support the conduct of credible elections); gender and inclusion expertise (experts deployed to ensure gender mainstreaming and inclusion in the national social and political processes); and political and human rights analysts (providing analytical capacity where there are risks of serious human rights violations). Sanctions monitoring groups (Panels of Groups of Experts deployed to monitor implementation of sanctions regimes) are also employed in particular circumstances [28].

5.      Obstacles to Effective Preventive Diplomacy

While the importance of conflict prevention is undeniable, the effectiveness of the UN’s preventive diplomacy efforts has come under question following outbreaks of violent conflict around the world. According to the UN/World Bank report, “Data suggest that, while diplomatic engagement is the most common form of international recourse in violent conflict, evidence of its ability to halt the outbreak of conflict is mixed” [29].

There exist several challenges to the UN’s efforts at preventive diplomacy. Within the Security Council, for example, divisions exist over the extent to which there can be “external involvement to prevent or mitigate conflict,” given that the UN Charter places a great deal of importance on the issue of state sovereignty [30]. Some Security Council members who agree with this view, believe that such interventions “can have the effect of exacerbating instability and conflict,” and are suspicious of the motives of the proponents of intervention [31]. Critics of this viewpoint suggest that this is simply a way to “protect . . . allies from international scrutiny.”  The political interests of Security Council members, especially when “one or more . . . is party to a conflict or provides support to one of the parties,” have therefore also inhibited timely prevention efforts in several conflict situations [32].

The report of the Advisory Group of Experts highlighted several challenges to effective peacebuilding by the UN, several of which also apply specifically to preventive diplomacy activities. The fragmentation of the UN System, with responsibilities distributed among the various Departments, Agencies, Funds and Programmes, as well as those between the Headquarters and field levels, is seen as one of the contributors to the ineffectiveness of effective peacebuilding. The UN has fallen short in its efforts to “Deliver as One,” and has continued to work in silos [33].

The AGE report also cited the insufficient institutional focus on conflict prevention, as well as a lack of women’s political participation. It also highlighted the positioning of the UN with regard to national leaders, noting that it is counter-productive for the UN to align itself to leaders “whose strategies and interests proved not to be aligned with peacebuilding,” at the expense of engaging with “broader domestic constituencies” [34].

Another factor that can inhibit the effectiveness of preventive diplomacy is the number of parties involved, each having its own diverse agenda. According to the UN/World Bank report, “the breadth and complexity of the conflict [in Yemen, for example] and the multiplicity of actors involved have defied long-standing efforts to secure lasting peace” [35].

6.      Effective UN Preventive Diplomacy

6.1.  understanding escalation.

Nathan et al point out that, in order to succeed, “preventive diplomacy actors must have a very good understanding of the conflict parties’ perspectives on violent and non-violent courses of action” [36]. They add that the context in which these actors operate (power structures, economic relations, social norms and ideology) impacts their behavior, and that violence is a chosen response to the prevailing social, economic and political conditions.

The authors describe the elements of an escalatory dynamic: 1) action-reaction; 2) growing polarization; 3) intense mistrust; 4) inflammatory threats; and 5) mutual demonization, which also influence the choice of the actors to take a path towards violence. Preventive diplomacy aims to assist parties to exit the escalatory dynamic and to “re-calibrate their cost-benefit analysis in favor of a non-violent course of action” [37].

6.2.  Prerequisites for Prevention

In their paper on conflict prevention, Day and Fong [38] identify five variables as being necessary for effective preventive diplomacy: 1) consent of the conflict actors; 2) timing of the diplomatic intervention; 3) the situational knowledge and associated relationships; 4) leverage available to be applied on the conflict actors; and 5) sustainability.

UN preventive diplomacy requires the “willingness of the parties to a dispute to permit the UN to play a part in resolving it,” otherwise known as their consent. Where this consent is not readily achieved, as a result of sovereignty concerns or other factors, the UN can continue to gradually work towards generating it, slowly “building the trust  and the space to engage” [39].

Regarding timing of the diplomatic intervention, the authors make use of a model developed by Gowan on the stages of escalation from pre-conflict to conflict. These comprise: “1) ‘latent tension,’ in which potential causes of conflict have been identified; 2) ‘rising tension,’ in which conflict is emerging and violence is spreading; 3) ‘decision points,’ when actors are on the verge of deciding for or against violence; and 4) ‘post-decision points,’ when actors have entered into either all-out violent conflict or fragile settlements” [40]. They suggest that preventive diplomacy has a unique potential for greater impact in stages two and three.

Day and Fong also point to the importance of an on-the-ground presence, mediator credibility, frank communication and engagement with all the parties, as critical to enhancing local knowledge and building the necessary relationships required for successful preventive diplomacy. The UN regional offices, Resident Coordinators and the UN Country Teams have been important platforms for ensuring the on-the-ground presence. Given the personal nature of diplomacy, mediators with situational knowledge and existing relationships with the actors prior to the crisis will have greater credibility [41]. The mediators should also possess very good communication, coordination and persuasion skills, and should adopt a “non-threatening, discreet posture, avoiding public criticism of the conflict parties” [42]. However, their pre-existing relationships with the parties can be used to facilitate candid exchanges with the actors on the options available as a result of their actions. Also, as the authors also point out, “Diplomacy can no longer afford to be state- or elite-centric, it must also account for a broader range of actors who can influence the trajectory of a conflict” [43].

With regard to leverage, the authors suggest that this is less of a requirement when parties are “looking for a [peaceful] way out” [44], in which case “discreet good offices” may suffice. However, if “their motivations . . . are pulling them towards violent conflict rather than away from it,” then forms of leverage – including “incentives and inducements” all the way to coercive measures, such as “sanctions, threats of prosecution by the International Criminal Court, or military intervention – may be applied. However, caution is advised in the application of coercive measures, as there is an accompanying risk of unexpected negative consequences, including escalation of the conflict. Instead, others suggest that “the deployment of UN resources and technical expertise can constitute soft leverage in support of UN diplomacy” [45]. In this regard, examples of possible entry points could be through support to elections, or UN development projects [46].

The last variable, sustainability, is critical in avoiding the outbreak or recurrence of violent conflict. The authors stress that “preventive diplomacy . . . should remain largely focused on agency and the core tasks of persuasion and political deal-making. At the same time these efforts should be linked to longer-term arrangements that can engage society more broadly in addressing underlying drivers such as inequality, relative poverty and exclusion” [47]. They suggest that 1) maintaining a supportive political constellation of regional and international actors; 2) achieving the buy-in of all conflict-affected parties; and 3) linking the political process with development, and thus “including development actors in crafting a diplomatic engagement and vice-versa, involving the political pillar more systematically in longer-term development planning” [48].

7.      Conclusion

Today’s conflicts are complex, with a multiplicity of actors, each with competing interests and claims to legitimacy. Nor is it a straightforward affair of one traditional state army against another, fighting across borders. Today’s conflicts are largely intrastate, and in some cases, involve proxies, funded and equipped by governments with their own agendas. However, regardless of its nature and form, the common thread is the adverse and debilitating consequences of violent conflict on the societies directly affected. And it is here that the UN, as well as other regional and sub-regional organizations have a responsibility to prevent the outbreak of violent conflict.

We have seen that there are several factors that work against the UN’s preventive diplomacy effectiveness. These include Security Council disunity and political interests, UN system fragmentation, lack of inclusivity in the interventions, particularly of women and affected constituencies. At the same time, there have been successes in places where these obstacles have been overcome like Burkina Faso, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Malawi and Yemen. However, these achievements have not prevented the recurrence of violence in Kenya in the 2017 elections or in the civil war that continues in Yemen. Conflicts are also ongoing in Libya, South Sudan and Syria, which indicate that there is still a lot or work to be done by the UN and other preventive diplomacy actors.

The good news is that the UN continues to evaluate its performance in this area, and lessons continue to be learned. The adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals, as well as the recent restructuring of the UN Secretariat Departments of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, and Peace Operations, are signs that the Organization is slowly moving away from the fragmentation that has plagued its existence and towards a unified approach across its peace and security, human rights and development pillars. Action must now speak louder than words, because it is what those most affected by conflict are demanding.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgment

I wish to acknowledge the support and direction provided by EUCLID University towards the completion of this paper.

• Day, Adam, and Alexandra Pichler Fong. “Diplomacy and Good Offices in the Prevention of Conflict – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research.” Last modified 2017. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://cpr.unu.edu/diplomacy-and-good-offices-in-the-prevention-of-conflict.html.
• Nathan, Laurie, Adam Day, Joao Honwana, and Rebecca Brubaker. “Capturing UN Preventive Diplomacy Success: How and Why Does It Work? – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research.” Last modified 2018. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://cpr.unu.edu/capturing-un-preventive-diplomacy-success-how-and-why-does-it-work.html.
• Security Council Report. “Can the Security Council Prevent Conflict? : Research Report : Security Council Report.” Last modified 2017. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/research-reports/can-the-security-council-prevent-conflict.php.
• United Nations. “2005 World Summit Outcome Document (16 September 2005) | United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination.” Last modified 2005. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://www.unsystem.org/content/2005-world-summit-outcome-document-16-september-2005.
• United Nations. “An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping: Report of the Secretary-General – United Nations and the Rule of Law.” Last modified 1992. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/blog/document/an-agenda-for-peace-preventive-diplomacy-peacemaking-and-peace-keeping-report-of-the-secretary-general/.
• United Nations. “Global Study on the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 | UN Women.” Last modified 2015. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://wps.unwomen.org/.
• United Nations. “Prevention of Armed Conflict: Report of the Secretary-General (A/55/985-S/2001/574) – World.” ReliefWeb. Last modified 2001. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://reliefweb.int/report/world/prevention-armed-conflict-report-secretary-general-a55985-s2001574.
• United Nations. “Report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture.” PeaceWomen. Last modified 2016. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://www.peacewomen.org/resource/report-advisory-group-experts-review-peacebuilding-architecture.
• United Nations. “Report of the Independent High-Level Panel on Peace Operations.” United Nations Peacekeeping. Last modified 2015. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/report-of-independent-high-level-panel-peace-operations.
• United Nations. “S/RES/2282 : UN Documents : Security Council Report.” Last modified 2016. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un-documents/document/sres2282.php.
• United Nations. “Statements Made by the President of the Security Council in 2007 | United Nations Security Council.” Last modified 2007. Accessed October 26, 2019. https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/statements-made-president-security-council-2007.
• United Nations. “UN Charter (Full Text).” Last modified April 15, 2016. Accessed March 16, 2019. http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/un-charter-full-text/.
• United Nations. “United Nations Conflict Prevention and Preventive Diplomacy in Action | Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs.” Last modified 2018. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://dppa.un.org/en/united-nations-conflict-prevention-and-preventive-diplomacy-action.
• United Nations, and World Bank. “Pathways for Peace : Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict.” Last modified 2018. Accessed October 20, 2019. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28337.
• United Nations and World Bank, “Pathways for Peace : Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,” 231, last modified 2018, accessed October 20, 2019 https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28337.
• United Nations, “UN Charter (Full Text),” 1, last modified April 15, 2016, accessed March 16, 2019, http://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/un-charter-full-text/.
• United Nations, “An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking and Peace-Keeping: Report of the Secretary-General – United Nations and the Rule of Law,” 5, last modified 1992, accessed October 20, 2019, https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/blog/document/an-agenda-for-peace-preventive-diplomacy-peacemaking-and-peace-keeping-report-of-the-secretary-general/.
• United Nations, “Prevention of Armed Conflict: Report of the Secretary-General (A/55/985-S/2001/574) – World,” ReliefWeb, 7, last modified 2001, accessed October 20, 2019, https://reliefweb.int/report/world/prevention-armed-conflict-report-secretary-general-a55985-s2001574.
• United Nations, “2005 World Summit Outcome Document (16 September 2005) | United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination,” 21, last modified 2005, accessed October 20, 2019, https://www.unsystem.org/content/2005-world-summit-outcome-document-16-september-2005.
• United Nations and World Bank, “Pathways for Peace : Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,” 237.
• United Nations, “Statements Made by the President of the Security Council in 2007 | United Nations Security Council,” 2, last modified 2007, accessed October 26, 2019, https://www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/statements-made-president-security-council-2007.
• United Nations, “Report of the Independent High-Level Panel on Peace Operations,” United Nations Peacekeeping, 16, last modified 2015, accessed October 20, 2019, https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/report-of-independent-high-level-panel-peace-operations.
• Security Council Report, “Can the Security Council Prevent Conflict? : Research Report : Security Council Report,” 10, last modified 2017, accessed October 20, 2019, https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/research-reports/can-the-security-council-prevent-conflict.php.
• United Nations, “S/RES/2282 : UN Documents : Security Council Report,” 2, last modified 2016, accessed October 20, 2019, https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un-documents/document/sres2282.php.
• United Nations, “Global Study on the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 | UN Women,” 399, last modified 2015, accessed October 20, 2019, https://wps.unwomen.org/.
• Adam Day and Alexandra Pichler Fong, “Diplomacy and Good Offices in the Prevention of Conflict – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 2, last modified 2017, accessed October 20, 2019, https://cpr.unu.edu/diplomacy-and-good-offices-in-the-prevention-of-conflict.html.
• Laurie Nathan et al., “Capturing UN Preventive Diplomacy Success: How and Why Does It Work? – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 2, last modified 2018, accessed October 20, 2019, https://cpr.unu.edu/capturing-un-preventive-diplomacy-success-how-and-why-does-it-work.html.
• United Nations, “United Nations Conflict Prevention and Preventive Diplomacy in Action | Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs,” 6–7, last modified 2018, accessed October 20, 2019, https://dppa.un.org/en/united-nations-conflict-prevention-and-preventive-diplomacy-action.
• United Nations and World Bank, “Pathways for Peace : Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,” 242.
• Nathan et al., “Capturing UN Preventive Diplomacy Success: How and Why Does It Work? – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 25–26.
• Security Council Report, “Can the Security Council Prevent Conflict? : Research Report : Security Council Report,” 14.
• United Nations, “United Nations Conflict Prevention and Preventive Diplomacy in Action | Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs,” 4–5.
• United Nations and World Bank, “Pathways for Peace : Inclusive Approaches to Preventing Violent Conflict,” 244.
• Security Council Report, “Can the Security Council Prevent Conflict? : Research Report : Security Council Report,” 4.
• United Nations, “Report of the Advisory Group of Experts on the Review of the Peacebuilding Architecture,” PeaceWomen, 25–26, last modified 2016, accessed October 20, 2019, https://www.peacewomen.org/resource/report-advisory-group-experts-review-peacebuilding-architecture.
• Nathan et al., “Capturing UN Preventive Diplomacy Success: How and Why Does It Work? – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 8.
• Day and Fong, “Diplomacy and Good Offices in the Prevention of Conflict – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 2.
• Nathan et al., “Capturing UN Preventive Diplomacy Success: How and Why Does It Work? – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 12.
• Day and Fong, “Diplomacy and Good Offices in the Prevention of Conflict – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 6.
• Nathan et al., “Capturing UN Preventive Diplomacy Success: How and Why Does It Work? – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 11.
• Day and Fong, “Diplomacy and Good Offices in the Prevention of Conflict – United Nations University Centre for Policy Research,” 9.

Table of Contents

RECENT ARTICLES:

Challenges and Strategies for Improving Hemophilia Care in Refugee Settings: A Comprehensive Examination from Health Systems, Humanitarian, Legal, and Healthcare Innovation Perspectives

ABSTRACT This paper addresses the critical healthcare challenges faced by refugees, particularly the management of chronic conditions like hemophilia, in the context of displacement due

Strengthening Public Sector Health Systems For Global Progress. Are There Lessons To Be Learned From Rwanda?

ABSTRACT One challenge experienced by health systems globally is the management of complex and changing health needs in areas of constrained resources. Building and strengthening

COP 28 – The First Global Stocktake – A Ray of Hope

ABSTRACT One of the key aspects of The Paris Agreement is to establish a method to evaluate the progress of collective efforts to meet the

Law and Regulations for Deep-Sea Mining: Following the Guidance of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

ABSTRACT The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) sets the guidelines for the care of the world’s oceans. This article will

Implications of Neurocognitive Impairment-Associated Neglected Tropical Diseases in Migrant Children Upon Settlement in a New Host Country

ABSTRACT This paper focuses on the critical yet often overlooked issue of Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs), particularly those that lead to Neurocognitive Impairment (NCI-NTDs), in

Windowless and Unintelligible: Case Studies of Diplomatic Grey Areas Within International Organizational Diplomacy

ABSTRACT An intricate web of diplomatic grey areas is prevalent within international organizations; accountability and transparency are words frequently floating around in the discussion of

Publisher information: The Intergovernmental Research and Policy Journal (IRPJ) is a unique interdisciplinary peer-reviewed and open access Journal. It operates under the authority of the only global and treaty-based intergovernmental university in the world (EUCLID), with other intergovernmental organizations in mind. Currently, there are more than 17,000 universities globally, but less than 15 are multilateral institutions, EUCLID, as IRPJ’s sponsor, is the only global and multi-disciplinary UN-registered treaty-based institution.

IRPJ authors can be assured that their research will be widely visible on account of the trusted Internet visibility of its “.int” domain which virtually guarantees first page results on matching keywords ( .int domains are only assigned by IANA  to vetted treaty-based organizations and are recognized as trusted authorities by search engines). In addition to its “.int” domain, IRPJ is published under an approved  ISSN for intergovernmental organizations  (“international publisher”) status (also used by United Nations, World Bank, European Space Agency, etc.).

IRPJ offers:

• United Nations Treaty reference on your published article (PDF).
• “Efficiency” driven and “author-focused” workflow
• Operates the very novel author-centric metric of “Journal Efficiency Factor”
• Minimal processing fee with the possibility of waiver
• Dedicated editors to work with graduate and doctoral students
• Continuous publication i.e., publication of articles immediately upon acceptance
• The expected time frame from submission to publication is up to 40 calendar days
• Broad thematic categories
• Every published article will receive a DOI from Crossref and is archived by CLOCKSS.

Copyright © 2020 IRPP et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

The appropriate office and officer will reply within 2 business days. If calling a EUCLID office, make sure to call the correct location based on your profile.

The application review process takes 4-6 business days after receipt of form and file.

EUCLID (Pôle Universitaire Euclide |Euclid University) A treaty-based organization with international liaison and representative offices in: New York, Washington DC, Montpellier (France)

Headquarters: Bangui, Central African Republic Commonwealth / ECOWAS Headquarters: Banjul, The Gambia

Studying with EUCLID

• Ph.D. / Doctorate
• Master's degrees
• Bachelor's degrees
• Habilitation and Post-Doc
• Specialized Certificates

Quick Access

• Tuition and Fees
• Scholarship Programs
• News and Events
• Faculty Profiles

Legal Protection Switzerland

About EUCLID

• Legal Status
• Accreditation
• Offices and HQs
• Annual Reports

The EUCLID Charter in UNTS

IRPJ: A PEER-REVIEWED ACADEMIC JOURNAL SPONSORED BY AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION UNDER UN-PUBLISHED TREATY MANDATE

• Preventive Diplomacy at the UN

In this Book

• Bertrand G. Ramcharan. Foreword by Leon Gordenker
• Published by: Indiana University Press
• Series: United Nations Intellectual History Project Series

Table of Contents

• Series Editors’ Foreword
• pp. xvii-xviii
• Preface and Acknowledgments
• pp. xix-xxi
• List of Abbreviations
• pp. xxiii-xxiv
• Secretaries-General on Preventive Diplomacy
• pp. xxv-xxvii
• Introduction
• 1 Preventive Diplomacy in the Concert of Europe, the Hague Peace Conferences, the League of Nations, and the UN Charter
• 2 UN Policies and Doctrines of Preventive Diplomacy
• 3 The Practice of Preventive Diplomacy by the Security Council
• 4 The Practice of Preventive Diplomacy by the Secretaries-General
• 5 Preventive Diplomacy during the Cuban Missile Crisis
• pp. 105-116
• 6 The Practice of Preventive Diplomacy by Representatives of the Secretary-General and UN Subregional Offices
• pp. 117-137
• 7 The Preventive Role of UN Peacekeepers and Observers
• pp. 138-148
• 8 Preventive Diplomacy in the Economic, Social, Human Rights,and Humanitarian Fields
• pp. 149-174
• 9 Preventive Diplomacy in an Age of Genocide, Terrorism, and Nontraditional Threats to Security
• pp. 175-193
• 10 Cooperative Preventive Diplomacy with Regional and Subregional Organizations
• pp. 194-208
• Conclusion: Some Thoughts for the Future
• pp. 209-216
• pp. 217-244
• pp. 245-262
• About the Author
• pp. 263-264
• About the United Nations Intellectual History Project
• pp. 265-266

Additional Information

Project MUSE Mission

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

©2024 Project MUSE. Produced by Johns Hopkins University Press in collaboration with The Sheridan Libraries.

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.

Preventive Diplomacy, Security, and Human Rights in West Africa pp 1–43 Cite as

Introduction: Preventive Diplomacy in Theory and Practice

• Okon Akiba 2  
• First Online: 11 June 2020

293 Accesses

The main concepts, norms, traditions, and theoretical constructs considered relevant for studying conflict including its impacts, management, and resolution are brought forward and explained in this chapter. Those roots of violence already identified by astute and judicious scholars are further interrogated to demonstrate how they apply to West Africa. The scope and limits of the ECOWAS Conflict Prevention Framework (ECPF) guiding the main lines of argumentations are also mapped, and the utility of alternative approaches to explaining conflict and preventive diplomacy is elaborated. Contributors are asked to consider the set of interrelated questions as follows: As a framework of analysis, what are the defining qualities of the ECPF? To what extent does this theoretical construction inform the overall activities of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) in regional conflict management and peacemaking? What are the main practical challenges and opportunities in the path of preventive diplomacy? In what ways can ECOWAS further strengthen or improve its conflict management instruments? Are conflict-prone countries yielding or resistant to preventive measures?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

International and Comparative Politics Professor, York University, Toronto, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and affiliations, rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Akiba, O. (2020). Introduction: Preventive Diplomacy in Theory and Practice. In: Akiba, O. (eds) Preventive Diplomacy, Security, and Human Rights in West Africa. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25354-7_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25354-7_1

Published : 11 June 2020

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-25353-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-25354-7

eBook Packages : Political Science and International Studies Political Science and International Studies (R0)

UNSC Open Debate on “Peace and Security through preventative diplomacy: A Common objective to all UN principal organs”

16 Nov 2021

Remarks by H.E. Mr. Abdulla Shahid, President of the 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly

16 November 2021

Mr. President,

Excellencies,

It is indeed a great honour to speak today at the Security Council Open Debate on “peace and security through preventive diplomacy”. My first, as the President of the 76 th session of the General Assembly.

I thank you Mr. President for the initiative and the invitation, as the President of the Security Council, for organizing this meeting.

For 76 years the United Nations has represented the pinnacle of what concerted diplomacy can achieve in preventing global conflict.

In that time, we have learned much about what is required to preserve international peace.

We understand better how socio-economic factors exacerbate conflict and more keenly appreciate diplomacy’s role in preventing it.

We understand that peace requires a holistic effort that goes beyond traditional paradigms.

One that considers the security, human rights, and development priorities of the entire membership.

One that empowers all voices in the global security discourse, including women and youth.

It is in acknowledgement of this that the membership has been increasingly calling for a more representative Security Council.

One that is better equipped to deal with the novel and complex challenges of the 21 st century.

One that works in tandem with other UN organs to deliver comprehensive solutions to current and emerging security issues. 

The Covid-19 pandemic has exacerbated socio-economic challenges. It has starkly highlighted the interconnectedness of today’s challenges. Our health, our economic prosperity, our planet’s wellbeing, and our safety and security – are all interlinked.

Indeed, the 2030 Agenda has long recognized that peace and sustainable development complement each other.

Communities that struggle to meet their most basic needs, or that lack economic and social mobility, are prone to unrest and strife.

Climate crises and disasters threaten displacement and force communities into competition over scarce resources.

Ineffective institutions rob people of hope and undermine their faith in governments and justice systems.

And the absence of democratic participation, political freedoms, and equality deprives entire populations of their human rights. This limits their ability to turn to peaceful recourse in redressing their grievances.  

We see these truths borne out in many conflict-ridden places across the world.

The global community simply must do more.

In addition to humanitarian relief, we must support preventive measures to build resilience, and strengthen sustainable development to give people the opportunity to live in dignity and in prosperity.

Truly, human rights, justice and sustainable development are our greatest tools in both building and maintaining peace and security.

Preventive diplomacy today is being conducted by a broader array of actors, using a wider range of tools, than ever before.

These include the development of early warning systems and targeted funding mechanisms for rapid response, the establishment of dedicated prevention structures, and the ongoing use of special envoys.

The critical importance of peacekeeping operations in the Organization’s overall peace and security toolkit has been recognized for decades.

However, today, sustaining peace and peacebuilding is no longer limited to traditional military peacekeeping but also includes strengthening capacities, institutions, and democratic integrity.

This dramatically reduces the likelihood of conflict and is one of the most effective strategies to secure durable peace.

The Peacebuilding Commission, which is an intergovernmental advisory body of the Security Council and the General Assembly, ensures sustained international attention to countries emerging from conflict, including to the reconstruction and institution-building efforts necessary for recovering from conflict.

I welcome the call in “Our Common Agenda” to invest in prevention and strengthening peacebuilding efforts through adequate and predictable financing.

And I call upon all UN bodies to coordinate to embed peacebuilding, and peacekeeping operations more deeply in the global security architecture.      

Global security will always be within the proper remit of the Security Council. However, work done by the General Assembly and ECOSOC to build resilient and prosperous communities facilitates the work of the Security Council.

In fact, in November 1999, the Security Council adopted a presidential statement recognising “the importance of building a culture of prevention… and the need for all UN organs to pursue preventive strategies”.

In fact, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in his 2011 report, “Preventive Diplomacy: Delivering Results” underscored the importance of preventive diplomacy throughout the conflict spectrum.

The report noted that “through its norm-setting capacity and deliberative functions, the General Assembly has a central role in contributing to a conducive environment for conflict prevention”.

The Secretary-General’s  “Our Common Agenda ” report, also stresses the importance of system-wide cooperation and the need for greater focus on prevention.

The agenda’s commitment to boosting partnerships envisions stronger engagement within the UN system and calls for reforms of the UN’s three principal organs: making the Security Council more representative, revitalizing the work of the General Assembly, and strengthening ECOSOC.   

Revitalizing the General Assembly is one the key elements of my ‘Presidency of Hope’. To that end, I not only want to make it more inclusive of the views and priorities of the membership, but also want to strengthen cooperation between the main UN organs, to streamline our responses to global challenges – including security challenges.

I call upon the membership to work together to implement General Assembly resolution 75/325 on ‘Revitalization of the work of the General Assembly’, which ‘encourages regular interaction and continued coordination between the Presidents of the General Assembly, the Security Council and ECOSOC’.

Regular coordination meetings between the General Assembly, the Security Council and ECOSOC, as mandated in the resolution, help bridge differences and improve the efficiency of our work.

On my part, as President of the General Assembly, I am keen to engage with my peers to synergize our efforts to recover better, improve global governance, and strengthen the international security regime.

Under my Presidency of Hope, I will continue to engage with Member States, as well as with the principal organs of the UN, to ensure progress in our common endeavors.

I hope that same spirit of cooperation will guide our discussions today.

I look forward to a wide-ranging and productive debate. I expect that their outcomes will put us in a better position to deliver to our global constituents.

Throughout our disarmament efforts, it is my conviction that women and youth can make a meaningful contribution. Let us take special pains to ensure that women and youth, as well as civil society, are more actively engaged in this work going forward.

President of the UN General Assembly

United Nations

A-Z Site Index | Contact | Copyright | Fraud Alert | Privacy Notice | Terms of Use

Este sitio web utiliza cookies propias y de terceros para su funcionamiento, mantener la sesión y personalizar la experiencia del usuario. Más información en nuestra política de Cookies

• Foreign policy

• Diplomacia preventiva

Preventative diplomacy

Preventive diplomacy includes all measures aimed at preventing existing disputes from escalating into conflicts and at preventing conflicts, if they occur, from spreading. Prevention addresses the root causes of conflict from a perspective that integrates the three pillars of the United Nations: peace and security, human rights and inclusive development. In 2015, the United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon presented a report entitled "The United Nations and Conflict Prevention: Renewing Collective Engagement". In this document he underlined the need to evolve from a traditional culture of reaction to a necessary essential culture of prevention. His successor, António Guterres, continued his legacy, making the culture of prevention one of the main priorities of his mandate. Spain has supported this commitment, as well as the need for the international community to strengthen the use of preventive tools and, furthermore, to take into account the involvement of other local participants and to promote intercultural and interreligious dialogue. Spain's presence in the Security Council between 2015 and 2016 was useful in strengthening the Council's preventive role, in order to improve its capacity to respond to emerging crises and potential threats to peace and security. It is no coincidence that conflict prevention is a fundamental part of Spain's current foreign policy. In view of the increase in conflicts, civil wars and the alarming figures of forced displacements, Spain considers it essential to use preventive diplomacy that integrates sustainable development, peace, governance, human rights and the rule of law. The Alliance of Civilisations builds on these principles. It is an initiative of the United Nations, co-sponsored by Spain and Turkey, which aims at promoting dialogue and cooperation between different communities, cultures and civilisations and to build bridges that unite peoples and individuals beyond their cultural or religious differences, developing a series of specific actions aimed at preventing conflicts and building peace. Spain has also led several initiatives related to mediation in recent years, focusing on the Mediterranean area, and has stressed the preventive dimension of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in the framework of the United Nations. Amongst Spain’s priorities in the field of preventive diplomacy, it is worth highlighting the implementation of National Action Plans on Women, Peace and Security. These plans comply with two clear lines of Spanish foreign policy: working for international peace and security and the fight in favour of non-discrimination on the basis of gender. Furthermore, in the field of youth, it is worth highlighting Spain's co-sponsorship of various United Nations Security Council Resolutions on the contribution of young people to the peace processes.​

Related documentation

You may also like.

• PRESS STATEMENT 015 Joint Statement by Commission Executive Vice-President Maroš Šefčovič and Foreign Minister of Spain José Manuel Albares The EU-UK negotiations on Gibraltar are progressing according to plan. We are entering into a sensitive phase of the negotiations. On the EU side, the negotiations ... Thursday, April 4, 2024
• PRESS STATEMENT 014 Joint Statement on the U.S.-Spain Central America Working Group At the U.S.-Spain Working Group on Central America both parties underscored the importance of international support for the peoples of Central America ... Tuesday, April 2, 2024

UN Day Essay Contest invites participants

Students of higher educational institutions of Turkmenistan are invited to participate in an essay competition on the theme "History of UN Preventive Diplomacy". The creative review was organized by the Institute of International Relations of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Turkmenistan on the occasion of the UN Day, which is celebrated annually on October 24.

Representatives of student youth wishing to take part in the competition are invited to write an essay on the above topic in English. The volume of the text should be 700-800 words. The work must be done with a line spacing of 1.5 and using Times New Roman font size 14.

The finished essay, as well as brief information about yourself, should be sent to the IMO MFA at [email protected] by October 20, 2022. Information about participants should include: full name, university, specialty, e-mail address and phone number. You must also attach a 3x4 photo.

The results of the competition will be summed up in the third decade of October 2022 based on the number of points of the participants. The 1st, 2nd and 3rd prizes will be distributed among the authors of the best works who have scored the most points according to the decision of the jury. The winners and prize-winners of the competition will be awarded during the solemn ceremony.

Additional information can be obtained by phone: +993 12 226876; +993 65 637823.

The competition is held within the framework of the Concept for the Development of the Digital Education System and the Concept for Improving the Teaching of Foreign Languages implemented in Turkmenistan.

According to the organizers, the competition is aimed at increasing interest and motivation in learning English - one of the official languages of the UN, enriching students' knowledge about the UN system and activities, identifying, developing and stimulating the creative abilities and initiatives of young people, as well as expanding the interaction of higher education institutions through digital information and communication technologies.

Anastasia Kasyanova

Category's latest posts

Search form

THE UNRCCA ACADEMY OF PREVENTIVE DIPLOMACY HELD AN ONLINE SESSION ON THE ROLE THE DPPA PLAYS IN THE UN SYSTEM

ASHGABAT, Turkmenistan

On 3 April, during the online session of the...

Find us on Twitter Find us on YouTube RSS feed