News

Mr. President, Thank you for organizing this highly pertinent debate. As other said, UN peacekeepers today operate in a more challenging environment than at any time in peacekeeping history, increasingly- where there is no peace to keep. The latest attack and loss of life in Mali is yet another reminder of the threats peace keepers face. In 2015, the HIPPO report and the report of the Expert Panel on technology and innovation in United Nations peacekeeping are clear on the need for change at all stages of mission life. Their recommendations, if realized, would help to improve missions’ ability to deliver on their mandates - and to protect peacekeepers who continue to lose their lives in the line of duty.

Lithuania associates itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union. In my national capacity let me add the following comments.

If situational awareness is missing or flawed, mandate implementation, including the core PoC function, will suffer. Force commanders will be handicapped in their decisions and their ability to keep their troops from harm’s way.  

As the Expert Panel points out, aerial data, geospatial/geographic information, and other remotely acquired data are of critical importance to any peacekeeping mission and should be available as a matter of course.

The use of technologies in peacekeeping would improve early warning, enhance the ability to detect, mitigate, deter, and respond to the threats of violence against civilians, and protect the lives of peacekeepers themselves. This is especially pertinent where peacekeepers face asymmetrical threats, a lot harder to predict and pin down without such data. We regret this continues to elicit strong resistance from some member states.

GPS technology in mission vehicles, night-vision goggles, infrared capabilities, reliable cellular or satellite communications are needed to better tackle such threats. Furthermore, medevac services must be readily available, especially where peacekeepers operate in high risk areas.  

Improved technology use should go hand in hand with enhanced inter-agency information sharing and better use of available data sharing tools. JOCs, JMACs, and GIS offices should be expeditiously and fully staffed and equipped to do their job. One should not have to wait months to fill such positions, especially where asymmetric threats are a daily reality to grapple with.

Mr. President,  

There is a clear urgency to address the IED threat, starting from pre-deployment training all the way to counter-IEDs capabilities on the ground, including ground sensors, jammers, radars, convoy protection and use of tactical UAVs in hazard areas.

TCCs/PCCs should prepare and equip their contingents to operate in asymmetric threats environments and adapt their SOPs accordingly. The inclusion of counter-IED expert capacity in peace operations to train and advise TCCs/PCCs as well as host nation security forces is a necessity.

My delegation commends UNMAS efforts in mitigating IED risks in Mali, Somalia and elsewhere by providing expert support, training, mentorship and equipment to the peacekeepers deployed.

Exploring and developing partnerships with other bodies and organisations that can offer relevant expertise and capacity to tackle the threat is important. A good example of such cooperation is the route clearance e-learning course, developed by NATO at UNMAS request. We note NATO’s readiness to identify and develop further training opportunities, as per UNMAS needs and requests.

We welcome the establishment of UN Peacekeeping Capabilities Readiness System which enables a more dynamic process of interaction between UNHQ and member states for ensuring the readiness and timely deployment of quality peacekeeping capabilities.

Mr. President,

The safety of peacekeepers should be on the Security Council priorities list as it designs or adjusts peacekeeping mandates. Peacekeepers should not be left to fend for themselves against the asymmetric threats. Numerous substantive recommendations to the effect already exist, including those contained in last year’s HIPPO and technologies UN peacekeeping reports.

At a time of increasingly scarce resources and a growing human cost of today’s asymmetric threats in peacekeeping, we simply cannot afford to keep commissioning new reports while ignoring their recommendations. The time is now to move from the “should do” narrative to “what has been done”, “what more needs to be done”, and ‘how best to do more”. Civilian victims and peacekeepers under attack need action, not words.