Security sector reform, peacebuilding and Bangladesh

This factor is therefore being emphasised by international organisations and Western donor countries that have begun to "mainstream" peacebuilding in their external policies. Similarly, the United Nations has also reinforced its capacity by establishing a Peacebuilding Commission.

The international community has had a long history of engaging in post-conflict peacebuilding but efforts directed towards Security Sector Reform (SSR) have been relatively new. This posture is based on the belief that SSR should now be a central focus in applying the principles of accountability, transparency and the rule of law.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

I believe that global security has become increasingly "collective, cooperative and multi-faceted." Holistic solutions are needed, where the UN, as a global player can play a more integrated role with regional groupings in peacebuilding.

Last year, there were 17 major armed conflicts in 16 different places, all of them "intra-state" conflicts. Against this backdrop, the demands for the international community to act have increased dramatically. Re-establishing a stable and secure peace is the aim -- not just the cessation of hostilities, but also the dynamic management of human, political and economic development.

SSR is now used to describe a range of activities, from development assistance and security policy to democratic reform. The concept is driven by recognition that an unreformed security sector is a major obstacle to sustainable peace.

In this context, it would be useful to highlight that peacebuilding generally involves three principles:

1. Local ownership: SSR initiatives must engage with the local community, using NGOs and individuals as bridges between governments and people.

2. Context is everything: There is no generic SSR model. It has to be adapted to local needs, respecting cultural patterns and engaging with recognised traditional sources of authority, where appropriate.

3. Cooperation and coordination: Effective SSR is a long-term job and those involved have to stay for the long haul. A long-term coherent approach is required to make SSR work. The UN's Peacebuilding Commission will help to develop this.

In this regard, the launch of the Peacebuilding Commission has been one of the most significant outcomes of last September's UN World Summit. It now provides the framework for coordinated action, including with civil society -- whose contribution in developing SSR has, in some cases, exceeded that of government bodies and academia, and should be more fully exploited.

Within the UN system, SSR has gained in relevance and effectiveness. It is now considered an essential element in any stabilisation process. The Security Council has also highlighted the need for adequate attention to be paid to SSR in future, drawing on best practice. Consequentially, the UN Secretariat is currently establishing a Peacebuilding Capacity Inventory.

These steps demonstrate that SSR is very much on the UN agenda and it is in a position to develop the necessary "holistic" approach to peacebuilding. However there still appears to be no common understanding, and even less, a comprehensive policy framework, to guide SSR programmes.

Slovakia, the forthcoming Security Council President, has pledged to use its Presidency to lead UN discussions on developing such a framework and improving security sector governance. One can only comment that it will be an ambitious goal, given the diverse and complex nature of the 191-strong membership of the UN. It might however be useful for Slovakia to rely on Article 54 of the UN Charter which emphasises the importance of regional organisations for maintaining global peace and security, given the regional dimensions of many current conflicts. Their expertise and resources could make them particularly valuable partners.

For example, the new Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) guidelines for SSR could be useful. It correctly stresses that local ownership is crucial for success. Multilateral organisations, in my opinion, would be better placed than individual states to support SSR because of their more transparent nature and also their ability with regard to capacity-building.

The relative importance of SSR within the EU Agenda has underlined this aspect. There is consensus within the EU that SSR has to be an increasing component of its dialogue with third countries. Elements of what is now considered SSR (e.g rule of law, governance support and human rights) are not new to the Union, and are now being used as standards to help third countries align themselves with the EU.

As such, it was not surprising, when the latest EU Summit in June, under the Austrian Presidency, indicated that security was a precondition for development. It asserted that SSR could also be an important "toolkit" in European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) missions by providing a series of achievable objectives, and engaging local actors with EU initiatives by allowing them to serve in advisory and mentoring roles on the ground. This was agreed upon because a consensus surfaced that a "holistic approach" was needed (which should include components like strengthening civil society, disarming, demobilising and reintegrating ex-combatants). This was a positive step in the right direction.

Lord Ashdown, former EU Special Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina, has come out in support of this idea and recently stressed that more thought must be given to the widening of the scope of the "holistic" approach being recommended for SSR and peacebuilding. He has also brought up three other important elements -- the reform of police and judicial system in post-conflict regions, the creation of employment opportunities and reducing factors that can generate corruption (for example, decisions with regard to customs duties). This approach appears to be most suitable and probably needs to be followed more vigorously, particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The international community has been involved with SSR efforts for quite some time. It has figured not only in Haiti, Afghanistan, East Timor, Iraq, and Democratic Republic of Congo but also earlier in the Balkans.

SSR has been a key tool for assisting with the transition from conflict to peace. It requires long-term engagement, but the international community has often suffered from 'engagement fatigue,' as happened in East Timor, where it moved out before the job was done. We have recently seen the unfortunate effect of such withdrawal in East Timor. Contrary to Bosnia, Sierra Leone or Kosovo, the military role was not widened in the post-conflict mission in East Timor and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. It did not go beyond securing the environment, and did not deal with traditionally non-military areas such as the fight against organised crime and healing the ethnic divide. We have seen the unraveling of East Timor and persistent trouble in the DR Congo as a consequence.

Bangladesh, presently the largest contributor to the UN Peacekeeping Forces, has been elected to the newly established 31-member UN Peacebuilding Commission. I believe that we will have an important role to play within this Commission.

I have written this article today from that context, I can only hope that our Ministry of Foreign Affairs in conjunction with our Ministry of Defence and the Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies (BIISS) will take suitable steps and start their homework in this regard. We should be ready to provide to the relevant authorities in the United Nations and to the Security Council the necessary support and guidance.

Muhammad Zamir is a former Secretary and Ambassador who can be reached at mzamir@dhaka.net