Mr. President,
Thank you for convening today’s joint debate on the Annual Report of the Peacebuilding Commission and the Secretary General’s Report on the Peacebuilding Fund.
Italy aligns itself with the statement by the European Union and would like to add the following remarks in its national capacity.
The Peacebuilding Architecture Review takes place at challenging times, due to the lack of trust among the membership and the struggle to find convergence.
However, we must seize this opportunity and find common ground on some building blocks where a wide consensus is within reach:
- First, the universality of conflict prevention, grounded on human rights, rule of law, WPS and YPS agendas;
- Second, the importance of national prevention strategies;
- Third, the need to allocate more financial resources for peacebuilding.
These starting points can be the bedrock for the Peacebuilding Architecture Review.
The New Agenda for Peace, the ongoing negotiations for the Pact for the Future and the idea itself of conflict prevention all point to a stronger role for the Peacebuilding Commission, because of its ability to analyse the situation on the ground and identify potential drivers of conflict.
But this key concept – conflict prevention – must be implemented wisely, respecting the national ownership of peacebuilding process and each specific path towards peace.
With regards to the Peacebuilding Commission’s working methods, substantial progress has been achieved in the last years.
At the same time, we should ask ourselves what more the Peacebuilding Commission can do to enhance the Security Council’s engagement with the PBC’s advice.
To make this qualitative leap, PBC’s guidance and advice must 100% reflect previous interactions with the States involved.
From the management of PBC meetings to the outcome documents we agree upon, we must genuinely respect the positions and aspirations as expressed by the Countries addressing the Peacebuilding Commission, including on issues which may result sensitive, such as climate change.
Only this way the Peacebuilding Commission can truly respect the national ownership of the peacebuilding process and contribute to forging a new social contract among generations.
As to peacebuilding financing, Italy considers the decision of devoting assessed fundings to the Peacebuilding Fund, while still delivering on voluntary contributions, as an irreversible step. This is why Italy, a strong promoter of assessed contributions for peacebuilding, at the same time has also doubled its voluntary contributions to the Peacebuilding Fund. We also welcome the ongoing initiatives aiming at measuring the impact of peacebuilding initiatives.
My final comment regards the recent decision to address a permanent invitation to the African Union to the Peacebuilding Commission’s meetings; it’s a decision Italy has been advocating for and that we welcome with great satisfaction. AU’s participation in the PBC’s meetings is consistent with the PBC’s goals and will bring the added value of a key actor. We look forward to working together within the PBC.
Thank you.
