Tag Archives: Peace

Creation of a Peace Facility for Africa

Creation of a Peace Facility for Africa

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Creation of a Peace Facility for Africa

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Development > African Caribbean and Pacific states (ACP)

Creation of a Peace Facility for Africa

Document or Iniciative

Decision 2003/3 of the ACP-EC Council of Ministers of 11 December 2003 on the use of resources from the long-term development envelope of the ninth EDF for the creation of a Peace Facility for Africa [pdf ].

Summary

The decision to create a Peace Facility for Africa follows a brief conferred by the Council at the session of 21 July 2003, in response to a request made by the African Union Summit (AU), which convened at Maputo on 4 – 12 July 2003.

The Decision allocated an initial amount of EUR 250 million to the Peace Facility for Africa for a period of three years from its date of entry into force.

The EUR 250 million came from the European Development Fund (EDF) under the Cotonou Agreement. Of this, EUR 126.4 million came from each African country’s contribution of 1.5 % from its allocated envelope. The remaining EUR 123.6 million were transferred from unallocated resources (reserves) of the 9th EDF.

The Council of 11 April 2006 decided to extend this initiative for the period 2008 – 10 by allocating EUR 300 million under the Intra-ACP Indicative Programme of the 10th European Development Fund.

This amount can be used to finance costs incurred by African countries deploying their peace-keeping forces in one or more other African countries (cost of carrying troops, soldiers’ living expenses, development of capabilities, etc.) but under no circumstances to cover military and arms expenditure.

The Peace Facility is based on the principle of African ownership. It supports African-led peacekeeping operations in Africa as well as capacity building for the emerging security structure of the African Union (AU). These operations are launched and implemented by the African Union’s organisations and/or by sub-regional organisations. The African Union is required to play a key role in the decision-making process relating to these operations.

The AU’s mission in Darfur/Sudan (AMIS) is the first to be supported by the Peace Facility for Africa following a decision in June 2004 for financing amounting to EUR 12 million.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Decision 2003/3 11.12.2003 OJ L 345, 31.12.2003.

Related Acts

Decision No 2/2007 of the ACP-EC Council of Ministers of 25 May 2007 allowing additional bilateral contributions, to be managed by the Commission, in support of the objectives of the African Peace Facility

Council Regulation (EC) No 617/2007 of 14 May 2007 on the implementation of the 10th European Development Fund under the ACP-EC Partnership Agreement [Official Journal L 152 of 13.6.2007].

Renewed engagement with Iraq

Renewed engagement with Iraq

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Renewed engagement with Iraq

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

External relations > Relations with third countries > Middle east

Renewed engagement with Iraq

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 7 June 2006: Recommendations for renewed European Union engagement with Iraq [COM(2006) 283 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

The Commission has proposed renewed EU engagement with Iraq based on its evaluation of the situation in Iraq and of relations between the two partners since the Framework for Engagement drawn up in 2004.

The political and constitutional process in Iraq has made progress, with the formation of the first Government, the 2005 elections and the new constitution. This notwithstanding, Iraq still faces instability, political tensions, and a deteriorating security environment.

In this context, the determinant factors for increased EU engagement are security and respect for the ethnic and religious communities in the political process.

Challenges For Iraq

The main challenges facing the new Iraqi government are interdependent, and are both political and economic in nature. The response to these challenges must be geared to benefiting the population at large and must therefore focus on better administration, economic stability and sustainable growth in order to consolidate democracy and stimulate the economy.

Consolidating democracy and strengthening civil society

Strengthening the democratic foundations of the country is essential to the continued pursuit of the political process of democratisation. The scheduled local and regional elections and the constitutional review process must go hand in hand with a stronger and more active civil society and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.

National cohesion requires respect for the ethnic and religious communities. The choice of model of governance and how it is applied within the public administration will be crucial, as the formation of a national unity government has already shown. Nonetheless, national reconciliation remains essential, especially in order to safeguard Iraq’s territorial integrity and prevent negative repercussions in neighbouring states.

Security and the rule of law are indissociable and need to be strengthened. The insecurity generated by sectarian-based violence, the impotence of the security forces, organised crime and street violence has caused widespread internal migration. Disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration (DDR) initiatives to combat violations of human rights, stop the displacement of whole communities and restore confidence are therefore essential.

Achieving the basis for sustainable economic development

Economic recovery presupposes viable basic services and the creation of employment opportunities and income generation activities. The knock-on effects will be felt in improved security and quality of life and a better utilisation of the country’s human capital.

Establishing a functioning administrative framework will make for good economic management, the provision of essential public services and the development and implementation of public policies. Reforming the public administration, with the support of the international community, will make it possible to modernise the civil service and enhance its competence and capabilities.

The country’s economic development needs to be based on:

  • its energy resources. Iraq’s large reserves of oil and natural gas remain largely unexploited (problems include aging infrastructures and outmoded techniques, lack of transparency, looting and trafficking), while heavy dependency on oil revenues makes the country very vulnerable to external economic factors;
  • economic diversification as a factor of prosperity. Water and agriculture are sectors that could generate income, create jobs and encourage investment, but only within the framework of a secure budgetary and regulatory environment.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EU SUPPORT

Iraq is a country rich in human, natural and cultural resources, which can serve as a foundation for stability and prosperity.

A stable and prosperous Iraq is also vital for its neighbours and international partners, including the EU, for security, economic, energy and political reasons. In this context, the EU is well placed to support Iraq, given its geographical proximity, its international role and its experience in post-conflict situations. It can also make good use of such instruments as political dialogue, financial aid, cooperation in the domain of the rule of law and the relations it has developed with Iraq to strengthen its engagement with that country.

In the short term, the EU should, for maximum impact, focus its engagement on certain key objectives that can yield tangible results. Nonetheless, Iraqi political will and improvement in the security situation will determine the nature of the EU’s continued engagement. This engagement must ensure, moreover, that the EU’s actions and its support for the actions of the United Nations and the other international players are carried out in a complementary manner.

A democratic government that overcomes divisions

It is essential that the government and the administration reflect the ethnic and religious composition of the population. Respect for the electoral process is also another way of restoring confidence.

The EU will support civil society and national, regional and local institutions, and will work with the international partners in the political process. Its support could make a contribution to:

  • inter-community relations, and particularly strategies and initiatives promoting respect, dialogue and national reconciliation while at the same time combating sectarianism, and policies supporting a multi-ethnic, pluri-confessional administration;
  • Iraq’s territorial integrity and national unity, promoting regional cooperation and relations with regional players;
  • the constitutional review process, where the Member States can provide valuable experience, and including support for ambitious measures relating to public information and dialogue with the people;
  • democratic and parliamentary institutions, through measures such as technical and other assistance and exchanges and twinning programmes to build up capacity. Support could also include continued assistance for the Independent Electoral Commission and other civil society organisations.

Establishing security through the rule of law and respect for human rights

The EU is already involved in this area, both through the work of individual Member States and in the framework of EU instruments like the EUJUST LEX mission launched in 2005. Pursuing European security and defence policy (ESDP), this mission works with all the players involved to develop an integrated rule of law / criminal justice system.

Its experience can be used to underpin:

  • the preparation of a rule-of-law programme to strengthen the civil and criminal justice systems;
  • development of a culture of respect for human rights and implementation of international conventions while building up the appropriate capacities for safeguarding them;
  • disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration activities (DDR).

Nonetheless, the Iraqi government still needs to curb the militias and non-government militarised groups and to create a supportive framework in which civil society can operate.

Basic services and employment

Improving access for the Iraqi population to basic services (water, education, electricity, health and sanitation) will improve the quality of life and foster sustainable stability. The EU has made a major contribution to such work through Community aid and close cooperation with the UN, but the commitment of the Iraqi government to social development is indispensable, particularly to secure the effective use of the aid supplied. The Iraqi National Development Strategy adopted in 2004 could, once updated, provide a platform for the implementation of these programmes.

Employment is a priority, but it requires an environment conducive to job creation and the development of income-generating activities. This could be addressed by harmonising the various reconstruction programmes, encouraging job creation in the private sector, including in small and medium-sized enterprises, and promoting a diversification of the economy.

Mechanisms to pave the way for economic recovery and prosperity

The Iraqi government needs to commit itself to the economic reforms that will boost growth, development and prosperity, help put an end to corruption and allow it to optimise the use of its resources.

Dialogue, cooperation programmes, exchanges of experience and financial aid are all means through which the EU and Iraq can work towards this end, focusing primarily on:

  • the energy sector. EU action will support both the domestic and the regional framework. A secure regulatory and financial framework will encourage investment and help deter corruption, criminality and organised crime. The establishment of regional networks and technical dialogues for the development and export of oil and gas resources will foster regional cooperation;
  • economic diversification and development of an attractive trade and investment regime. The negotiation of a Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) that will bring Iraq closer to the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the improvement of Iraqi access to the European market (generalised system of preferences), the engagement of the European Investment Bank (EIB) in Iraq, and Community assistance to consolidate the Iraqi Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance will back up this process.

An effective and transparent administrative framework

Iraq must push ahead with public administration reforms (judicial structures, human resources, sound financial management, etc.). A ‘roadmap’ based on realistic goals and benchmarks will help the Iraqi government fulfil its commitments to its international partners.

The EU is well placed to help implement these reforms through experience from the enlargement process and support for building capacity and institutions in other parts of the world. In this context, the negotiation of a TCA with Iraq will be an additional area in which the EU can make a contribution, both by spurring Iraq to establish a functioning administration to manage the implementation of the agreement and by providing a framework for setting up technical working groups to support the exchange of know-how and expertise.

Context

The Commission’s 2004 Communication entitled The European Union and Iraq: A Framework for Engagement and the accompanying letter signed by the Commissioner for External Relations and the High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) set out a medium-term strategy for EU engagement with Iraq as a response to the formation of the new Iraqi Interim Government and the adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 1546.

This medium-term strategy was aimed chiefly at the development of a secure, stable and democratic Iraq, with a sustainable market economy, at peace with its neighbours and integrated into the international community. The EU’s engagement has translated into:

  • support for the political and constitutional process (provision of expertise and resources for the electoral process and the establishment of the rule of law) and stepped-up engagement with the Iraqi political leadership (EU-Iraq Joint Declaration on Political Dialogue signed on 21 September 2005 [PDF ], Troika visits, and the June 2005 EU-US sponsored international conference on Iraq in Brussels;
  • strengthening bilateral relations with the opening of a European Commission delegation and an offer to start negotiations for a TCA;
  • contributing to the international engagement with Iraq by providing substantial financial aid, notably through the International Reconstruction Fund Facility for Iraq, and by maintaining close contact with other key international players committed to supporting Iraq.

Related Acts

Declaration of 22 June 2005 of the Brussels International Conference for Iraq [FR ] [PDF].

EU – Iraq Joint Declaration on Political Dialogue, signed on 21 September 2005 [PDF ].

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 1 October 2003: “The Madrid Conference on Reconstruction in Iraq – 24 October 2003” [COM(2003) 575 final – Not yet published in the Official Journal].

 

Role of the European Union in the multilateral system of the UN

Role of the European Union in the multilateral system of the UN

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Role of the European Union in the multilateral system of the UN

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Development > General development framework

Role of the European Union in the multilateral system of the UN

The EU develops relationships and builds partnerships with third countries and international, regional or global organisations which share its principles and values. It promotes multilateral solutions to global problems, in particular within the framework of the United Nations (UN) (Article 21 of the Treaty on EU).

The EU therefore contributes towards strengthening the effectiveness of the multilateral system and reforming the system of governance of the UN *, for a stronger international society founded on the proper functioning of international institutions and due process of law.

In addition, the European security strategy highlights the fundamental role of the Charter of the United Nations as a framework for international relations and the vital role of the UN Security Council in maintaining peace and global security.

EU participation in the UN system

The EU has had the status of observer member within the UN since 1974. Since the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the EU has had legal personality and sole capacity to represent the Member States at the UN (Resolution 665/276 of the UN General Assembly). These representation duties are performed by the President of the European Council, the High Representative, the Commission and the EU delegations.

The EU also has an essential role in the development, adoption and implementation of its partner countries’ multilateral commitments.

Finally, the partnership between the EU and the UN is based on political and operational cooperation for the completion of joint programmes and projects. In this respect, the combined financial contribution of the EU and its Member States is one of the main sources of the UN’s budget.

The principal areas of cooperation are as follows:

  • maintaining peace and security in the world, through a full partnership ranging from conflict prevention to reconstruction and peacebuilding. The EU’s contribution takes the form of human and financial resources. In addition, the EU’s foreign and security policy (CFSP) allows an increase in civil and military cooperation. This partnership extends to reform of the security sector, mediation and conflict management capacity, the combating of illicit trafficking in small arms and ammunition, and the promotion of the role of women in peace processes;
  • the promotion of human rights, gender equality and democracy, by defending standards and mechanisms for the protection of human rights, within the UN and through bilateral cooperation. Action in this area concerns, in particular, the rights of women and children, electoral assistance and the strengthening of parliaments, legal systems and civil society;
  • human, economic and social development, particularly by coordinating action in the field of development assistance and humanitarian aid. The fight against poverty and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) represent priorities for cooperation, including through the UN’s agencies, funds and thematic programmes;
  • environmental protection and tackling climate change, particularly for the adoption of agreements and international conventions, and for the reform of international environmental governance;
  • humanitarian assistance and food aid, in particular through the UN’s special mandate and aid from the EU, which is the largest sponsor of operations undertaken worldwide. The partners are also committed to risk management, assessing the needs of third countries and reform of the humanitarian system;
  • the fight against international and regional threats to security, such as terrorism, the proliferation of small arms and light weapons, organised crime, drug trafficking and money laundering.
Key terms
  • Multilateral governance: a method of organisation of international relations, involving more than two States.
  • System of governance of the UN: a concept defined by the Commission as applying to the main bodies of the UN (the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and their subsidiary bodies, the Security Council, the Secretariat), and the programmes, funds and specialised institutions of the United Nations, including the Bretton Woods institutions (the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund).

The European Union and the United Nations: The choice of multilateralism

The European Union and the United Nations: The choice of multilateralism

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about The European Union and the United Nations: The choice of multilateralism

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Development > General development framework

The European Union and the United Nations: The choice of multilateralism

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 10 September 2003 – The European Union and the United Nations: the choice of multilateralism [COM(2003) 526 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

This Communication examines the means available to the European Union (EU) to contribute towards the continuous improvement of global governance, through the United Nations’ (UN) * governance system.

The EU therefore renews its support for the UN’s multilateral governance system * as an instrument for adopting concrete solutions at a global level, to the benefit of sustainable development, poverty reduction, peace and security, in particular.

Effectiveness of multilateral governance

The EU must increase its contribution with a view to adopting and applying multilateral policies and instruments. The EU’s influence could be a determining factor in the implementation of global commitments by its Member States and third country partners.

In addition, the EU must take a more active role in the institutional reform process of the UN in order to increase the effectiveness of the system, to adapt it to the development of multilateral reports, and to promote the international policy of development assistance.

Similarly, an improvement in coordination and cooperation at international level should facilitate the monitoring of commitments and strengthen actions for peace, security and human rights.

Lastly, European external policy supports the capacity-building of developing countries to meet their international commitments. In particular, the EU integrates the objectives of sustainable development, trade assistance, the promotion of decent working standards, and combating terrorism, drug trafficking and organised crime into its external policy programmes.

Effectiveness of collaboration

The Commission presents a set of guidelines for greater partnership between the EU and the UN, in order to:

  • increase policy dialogue, through increasing high-level meetings and cooperation with UN agencies;
  • strengthen EU representation within the UN;
  • increase financial cooperation and the EU’s financial contribution to UN operations;
  • conclude strategic partnerships with UN agencies, funds and programmes in the areas of development assistance and humanitarian aid;
  • conduct a strategic dialogue on coordinating humanitarian aid activities.

Political and technical cooperation must also be increased in the area of peace and security, whether for conflict prevention, crisis management or post-crisis reconstruction. This partnership must be systematically extended to the competent regional organisations (such as the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe).

Promoting the values and interests of the EU

The EU contributes substantially to the development of policies adopted within the UN. However, it is still necessary to improve the coordination of its Member States’ positions, to ensure that the objectives of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) are consistent with the positions of the UN Security Council, and also to increase the role of EU delegations to the UN.

In order to increase the influence of the EU within the UN governance system, the Commission recommends:

  • coordinating the Member States’ positions and participating in the decision-making process as soon as possible, particularly regarding international social policy, health, human rights, development cooperation and humanitarian aid;
  • improving coordination and the EU’s dialogue with countries or groups of countries affected by specific issues;
  • ensuring that European policies are compatible with international policies, and ensuring that effective European representation is in place with regard to the work of the UN on subjects which affect the EU.
Key terms
  • United Nations governance system: a concept defined by the Commission as applying to the main bodies of the UN (the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Council and their subsidiary bodies, the Security Council and the Secretariat), and the programmes, funds and specialised institutions of the United Nations, including the Bretton Woods institutions (the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund).
  • Multilateral governance: a method of organisation of international relations, involving more than two States.

Conflict prevention

Conflict prevention

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Conflict prevention

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Foreign and security policy > Conflict prevention

Conflict prevention

INTRODUCTION

  • Conflict prevention
  • EU response to fragile situations
  • Instrument for Stability (2007 – 2013)
  • Cooperation with ACP States involved in armed conflicts
  • Disaster and crisis response in Non-EU Member Countries

CIVILIAN CRISIS MANAGENT

  • Financing of civilian crisis management operations
  • Civilian Headline Goal 2008


Another Normative about Conflict prevention

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic

Foreign and security policy > Conflict prevention

Conflict prevention

Document or Iniciative

Commission Communication of 11 April 2001 on Conflict Prevention [COM(2001)211 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

Background

Many factors contribute to conflict – poverty, economic stagnation, uneven distribution of resources, weak social structures, lack of good governance, systematic discrimination, oppression of minorities, the destabilising effects of refugee flows, ethnic antagonism, religious and cultural intolerance, social injustice and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and small arms. To control these factors and ensure that they do not lead to conflict, the Commission has drawn up a list of potential causes of conflict to monitor.

The Communication is divided into three sections referring to the Commission’s priorities: long-term prevention, short-term prevention and enhanced international cooperation. An annex contains a list of recommendations for the three priorities.

Long-term prevention: projecting stability

As a promoter of integration, the EU has for decades maintained special relations with its neighbours, which have helped to maintain a high level of stability and prosperity. This regional cooperation has not stopped at the EU’s borders, and could also serve as an example to bodies such as Mercosur, the West African Economic and Monetary Union (UEMOA) and the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC), which already receive EU support.

Trade is an important aspect of cooperation and development and contributes to conflict prevention. Through the Generalised System of Preferences (GSP), the EU facilitates access to the European market for most products from developing countries. The system is based on tariff preferences at variable rates, accompanied by trade-related capacity building. Since February 2001, the Everything but Arms initiative has given duty-free access to the European market, without quotas, to all products from the least developed countries (LDCs) other than arms. These preferences may be suspended if a country’s political situation deteriorates.

Conflict prevention must be incorporated in cooperation programmes, since violent conflict rarely springs out of nowhere, but is the result of a gradual deterioration. Development policy and cooperation programmes are therefore effective instruments for dealing with the root causes of conflict. Their emphasis is on reducing poverty.

It is, however, not enough for the EU to be a major supplier of aid to the world. It’s approach must also be integrated, i.e. take account of each country’s specific conditions while seeking sustainable or structural stability, as in Salvador and Guatemala.

Country strategy papers (CSP) are an essential part of this integrated approach. They include an evaluation of potential conflict using the indicators referred to above. Conflict prevention measures will thus be incorporated in the cooperation programmes of countries with obvious risk factors.

For sustainable stability and conflict prevention, a healthy macroeconomic environment is also necessary. The Commission therefore provides financial support for appropriate economic reform programmes in highly indebted poor countries (HIPC).

A democratic deficit goes hand in hand with the potential for conflict. Countries at risk therefore tend to have a poorly developed democratic process, making external support difficult to implement. To support democracy, the rule of law and civil society, the EU conducts operations in the fields of transition, democratic elections, civil and political rights, freedom of expression and of the media, good governance, the development of civil society and gender equality. Particular emphasis will be placed on support to electoral processes, parliamentary activities and the administration of justice.

Measures to support security reforms (police, armed forces, etc.) and specific measures for post-conflict situations are also necessary. The latter include demobilisation, disarmament and reintegration (DDR), demining operations, particular attention to children affected by armed conflict, and measures to promote the reconciliation process.

A third aspect of long-term prevention is more effective handling of cross-cutting issues such as drugs, small arms, the management of natural resources, environmental degradation, communicable diseases, massive population flows, human trafficking and private-sector interests in unstable areas. The Communication gives examples of EU initiatives to combat the negative impact of these practices and explains the importance for conflict prevention of eliminating them. Private businesses in unstable areas have a responsibility in terms of a country’s socio-economic development and also in terms of their possible contribution to maintaining, or even creating, structural causes of conflict. Guidelines therefore encourage businesses to behave more responsibly. This includes respect for the human rights of local people, and non-interference in the political process.

Short-term prevention: reacting rapidly to incipient conflicts

In parallel with the long-term strategy, early-warning and rapid reaction capacity is also needed. Two classic EU instruments, of which optimal use must be made, are emergency economic assistance and election observers. It also has political and diplomatic instruments at its disposal, such as political dialogue, Special Representatives and the use of sanctions. In its recommendations the Commission proposes making political dialogue more focused and flexible, giving Special Representatives the role of full mediators and using sanctions preventively as well as reactively. It also considers that the civilian and military crisis-management tools developed in the context of the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) could be used in pre-crisis scenarios.

The EU also has a Rapid Reaction Mechanism with a single financial and legal framework, which facilitates Commission action in this field.

Enhancing international cooperation on conflict prevention

The Commission considers that the “Friends of” approach, bringing together a country’s suppliers of aid, is a good method for coordinating action with partner countries in post-conflict situations. Prevention also occupies an important place in the EU’s dialogue with industrialised countries.

In terms of international organisations, the Commission advocates enhanced cooperation with the United Nations, the Bretton Woods institutions (World Bank and International Monetary Fund), the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the Council of Europe, the Organisation for Cooperation and Economic Development (OECD) and the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States). Such cooperation will take account of the specific characteristics of each organisation.

The Commission recognises the essential role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs), particularly on the ground, and states its intention of emphasising conflict prevention in its dealings with them.

Conclusion

The Commission considers that the advantage of conflict prevention has been demonstrated, and is determined to mobilise Community instruments more effectively and with better coordination. It intends to direct its efforts towards:

  • building the objectives of peace, democracy and political and social stability more clearly into assistance programmes;
  • ensuring that account is taken of political and social exclusion, social and regional marginalisation and environmental degradation;
  • bringing added value to international initiatives on cross-cutting issues which are potential sources of conflict;
  • making effective use of other means such as trade and social policy;
  • developing new approaches and instruments.

In conclusion, the Commission states that the EU’s capacity for action is dependent on three factors: a clear definition of objectives, the capacity to act and, most importantly, the political will to act. A list of recommendations derived from the Communication is annexed.

Related Acts

Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds [Official Journal No L 358 of 31.12.2002]

Commission Communication of 29 November 2001 on Financing of civilian crisis management operations [COM(2001) 647 final – Not published in the Official Journal]

Council Regulation (EC) No 381/2001 of 26 February 2001 creating a rapid-reaction mechanism [OJ L 57of 27.2.2001]

Commission Communication of 11 April 2000 on EU election assistance and observation [COM(2000) 191 final – Not published in the Official Journal]

Commission Report: “One Year On: the Commission’s Conflict Prevention Policy”, March 2002

by the Secretary General/CFSP High representative and the Commission to the Nice European Council, 7-8 December 2000.

Financing of civilian crisis management operations

Financing of civilian crisis management operations

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Financing of civilian crisis management operations

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Foreign and security policy > Conflict prevention

Financing of civilian crisis management operations

Document or Iniciative

Commission Communication of 29 November 2001 on Financing of civilian crisis management operations [COM(2001) 647 final – Not published in the Official Journal]

Summary

In view of the need for more effective and reliable procedures for the rapid financing of civilian crisis interventions, the Commission has drawn up recommendations on the subject. It proposes a new flexibility instrument to permit the release of additional funds for external action, while remaining within the financial perspectives. It also believes that the procedures should be made less cumbersome and that Member State contributions could be considered in exceptional circumstances.

A new flexibility instrument

The Commission considers that since the Treaties of Maastricht and Amsterdam established new instruments for action in this field, and given the scale of the crises with which the EU must respond, it is important to ensure coordination and cohesion between the instruments. There must be no confusion about the distribution of tasks. As in the case of the (RRM), it proposes a derogation from the rule requiring CFSP crisis operations to be charged to the regular budget.

Given that both Community and CFSP appropriations depend on the financial perspectives, the Commission considers ways of mobilising needed to respond to a crisis situation. One solution would be to create a crisis management reserve outside the heading for external actions. This would allow the EU to live up to its ambitions, but could also involve a revision of the ceiling. The Commission therefore feels that it would be more prudent to create a new flexibility instrument allowing the EU to respond to unexpected situations without changing the financial perspective ceiling. At the same time the use of the current emergency reserve would be extended to CFSP crisis interventions.

The new instrument should be backed up by improved management, with faster decision-making, adoption and implementation procedures. The mobilisation of the funds from the emergency reserve would follow the present rules. In the Commission’s view this arrangement has three advantages:

Member States only have to contribute when the reserve is exhausted;

  • there is no need to establish a new funding key; and
  • maintaining established budgetary management structures means that administrative overheads can be kept to a minimum

Background

The Court of Auditors has criticised the cumbersome nature of common foreign and security policy (CFSP) procedures for financing civilian crisis management. It believes that the Commission should be more involved at the preparatory stage and that transparency should be improved.

Civilian crisis management operations have four priority fields of action, established by the Feira European Council: the police, the rule of law, civilian protection and civilian administration. The source of their budget financing depends on their purpose and their content. Funds may come from three different budget lines:

  • the appropriate Community budget line, when the operations are conducted under a Community instrument (information or observation missions, training, economic and trade development incentives, mine clearance, human rights, reconstruction, food aid, humanitarian interventions, etc.);
  • the CFSP budget line for CFSP operations without military or defence implications (such as disarmament, support for peace processes, political assistance, etc.);
  • a budget other than the EC budget for operations under the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) with military or defence implications.

In the case of CFSP operations, procedures are becoming too cumbersome and threaten to reduce the potential and credibility of the European Union. The Commission considers that if the Community wishes to continue financing CFSP operations from the budget, it must note sure they can be implemented rapidly. Two options could be considered in the context of the CFSP to remove the budgetary constraints: systematic drawing on Member State contributions or increasing the flexibility of the regular budget. The Commission considers the second option more appropriate, since creating a new ad hoc fund would raise many issues concerning its management, control and coherence.

Related Acts

Council Regulation (EC) No 458/2008 of 26 May 2008 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds [Official JournalL 137, 27.5.2008].

Commission Communication of 1 October 2004: Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing an Instrument for Stability [COM (2004) 630 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Commission Communication of 11 April 2001 on Conflict Prevention [COM(2001)211 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Council Regulation (EC) No 381/2001 of 26 February 2001 creating a rapid-reaction mechanism [Official Journal L 57of 27.2.2001].

Council Regulation (EC) No 2368/2002 of 20 December 2002 implementing the Kimberley Process certification scheme for the international trade in rough diamonds [Official Journal No L 358 of 31.12.2002].

Commission Communication of 11 April 2000 on EU election assistance and observation [COM(2000) 191 Commission Report: One Year On: the Commission’s Conflict Prevention Policy, March 2002

by the Secretary General/CFSP High Representative and the Commission to the Nice European Council, 7-8 December 2000.

EU response to fragile situations

EU response to fragile situations

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about EU response to fragile situations

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Humanitarian aid

EU response to fragile situations

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 25 October 2007 – Towards an EU response to situations of fragility – engaging in difficult environments for sustainable development, stability and peace [COM(2007) 643 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

Fragile situations are a major obstacle to sustainable development, regional stability and international security. They are triggered by several factors, such as structural fragility of the economy, a number of democratic governance shortcomings, environmental degradation or access to natural resources. In these situations, the State is unwilling or incapable of meeting its obligations regarding service delivery, management of resources, rule of law, security and safety of the populace and protection and promotion of citizens’ rights and freedoms.

By virtue of its position as main donor of humanitarian aid and development aid and as an important actor in international security and policy matters, the EU has special responsibilities in addressing situations of fragility.

Early warning, analytical, monitoring and assessment tools have been developed in the area of fragility prevention. Development cooperation and political instruments play an important role in the implementation of preventive measures. Development cooperation addresses the root causes of insecurity. Within this context, country strategy papers (CSPs) present a potential that needs to be enhanced. And political dialogue, an essential element of any cooperation agreement between the EU and third countries, can help to build national strategies aiming at a durable exit from fragility.

First of all, the response to fragility is ensured by long-term development cooperation, through the CSPs in particular. In cases where this is not possible due to deterioration of the situation, the EU applies political and diplomatic instruments. Finally, when situations of fragility slide into crises with humanitarian implications, humanitarian aid is provided.
Response to fragility must be adapted to the country concerned, by focusing long-term strategic response and initial response on addressing the immediate needs of the population, vulnerable groups in particular. Moreover, it is important to avoid creating “aid orphans”, by striving for complementarity in interventions through the EU Code of Conduct and, within the humanitarian aid framework, through its Forgotten Crisis Assessment methodology. Further coordination within the EU is also necessary.

Management of the post-crisis phase is ensured by the “Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development ” (LRRD) strategic framework, which aims at the creation of synergies between the withdrawal of humanitarian aid and the transition to development activities. The Commission underlines the need to improve the framework, through better integration of governance, institutional development and security in particular.

In addressing fragility, the EU must improve the use of its resources, i.e. Community instruments, the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) instruments, but also Member States’ bilateral aid. Specifically, it should encourage increased synergy between existing financial instruments, i.e.:

  • The European Development Fund (EDF), which finances flexible mechanisms for post-emergency action and transition to the development phase.
  • The Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) and European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), which provide for a special emergency procedure allowing transition to development and specific measures to be implemented when stability and humanitarian aid measures cannot intervene.
  • The Instrument for Stability, which provides for support in situations of crisis or emerging crisis, initial post-crisis political stabilisation and early recovery from natural disasters.
  • The humanitarian aid instrument, used when situations of crisis have humanitarian implications, whatever the level of fragility and the causes of the crisis.
  • The thematic programme Non State Actors and Local Authorities in Development and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), which provide for procedures applicable to situations that are not favourable to participatory development or to respect for human rights. Specifically, the EIDHR can fund activities without approval from the governments of partner countries, which is fundamental in certain situations of fragility.
  • Budget support, which has often been used by the Commission in post-conflict cases to address urgent financial needs, consolidate key state functions and maintain social stability.

Finally, the Commission proposes a series of actions, namely:

  • Endorsement and implementation of Principles of Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations , elaborated by the OECD Development Aid Committee (DAC).
  • More systematic inclusion of issues concerning fragility in the political dialogue with fragile partner States.
  • Regular exchanges of risk analyses and relevant EU responses, at the field level and also at headquarters.
  • Mapping of bilateral and EU aid modalities with particular focus on the complementarity of CFSP/ESDP joint actions, the Instrument for Stability, the African Peace Facility and long-term cooperation instruments.
  • Review of assessment and analytical tools on governance, conflicts and disaster monitoring.
  • Improvement of the budget support mechanism, including through better coordination with international financial institutions.
  • Strengthening of the partnership with the United Nations and other multilateral organisations.

Related Acts

Council conclusions on EU response to situations of fragility. General Affairs and External Relations Council – 19 November 2007 [Not published in the Official Journal] (pdf ) (FR).

The Council approves, among other things, in the name of the EU, the “Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations” and calls on the Commission to present an implementation plan for the year 2009 based on its conclusions.


Another Normative about EU response to fragile situations

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic

Foreign and security policy > Conflict prevention

EU response to fragile situations

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions of 25 October 2007 – Towards an EU response to situations of fragility – engaging in difficult environments for sustainable development, stability and peace [COM(2007) 643 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

Fragile situations are a major obstacle to sustainable development, regional stability and international security. They are triggered by several factors, such as structural fragility of the economy, a number of democratic governance shortcomings, environmental degradation or access to natural resources. In these situations, the State is unwilling or incapable of meeting its obligations regarding service delivery, management of resources, rule of law, security and safety of the populace and protection and promotion of citizens’ rights and freedoms.

By virtue of its position as main donor of humanitarian aid and development aid and as an important actor in international security and policy matters, the EU has special responsibilities in addressing situations of fragility.

Early warning, analytical, monitoring and assessment tools have been developed in the area of fragility prevention. Development cooperation and political instruments play an important role in the implementation of preventive measures. Development cooperation addresses the root causes of insecurity. Within this context, country strategy papers (CSPs) present a potential that needs to be enhanced. And political dialogue, an essential element of any cooperation agreement between the EU and third countries, can help to build national strategies aiming at a durable exit from fragility.

First of all, the response to fragility is ensured by long-term development cooperation, through the CSPs in particular. In cases where this is not possible due to deterioration of the situation, the EU applies political and diplomatic instruments. Finally, when situations of fragility slide into crises with humanitarian implications, humanitarian aid is provided.
Response to fragility must be adapted to the country concerned, by focusing long-term strategic response and initial response on addressing the immediate needs of the population, vulnerable groups in particular. Moreover, it is important to avoid creating “aid orphans”, by striving for complementarity in interventions through the EU Code of Conduct and, within the humanitarian aid framework, through its Forgotten Crisis Assessment methodology. Further coordination within the EU is also necessary.

Management of the post-crisis phase is ensured by the “Linking Relief, Rehabilitation and Development ” (LRRD) strategic framework, which aims at the creation of synergies between the withdrawal of humanitarian aid and the transition to development activities. The Commission underlines the need to improve the framework, through better integration of governance, institutional development and security in particular.

In addressing fragility, the EU must improve the use of its resources, i.e. Community instruments, the common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP) instruments, but also Member States’ bilateral aid. Specifically, it should encourage increased synergy between existing financial instruments, i.e.:

  • The European Development Fund (EDF), which finances flexible mechanisms for post-emergency action and transition to the development phase.
  • The Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) and European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), which provide for a special emergency procedure allowing transition to development and specific measures to be implemented when stability and humanitarian aid measures cannot intervene.
  • The Instrument for Stability, which provides for support in situations of crisis or emerging crisis, initial post-crisis political stabilisation and early recovery from natural disasters.
  • The humanitarian aid instrument, used when situations of crisis have humanitarian implications, whatever the level of fragility and the causes of the crisis.
  • The thematic programme Non State Actors and Local Authorities in Development and the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR), which provide for procedures applicable to situations that are not favourable to participatory development or to respect for human rights. Specifically, the EIDHR can fund activities without approval from the governments of partner countries, which is fundamental in certain situations of fragility.
  • Budget support, which has often been used by the Commission in post-conflict cases to address urgent financial needs, consolidate key state functions and maintain social stability.

Finally, the Commission proposes a series of actions, namely:

  • Endorsement and implementation of Principles of Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations , elaborated by the OECD Development Aid Committee (DAC).
  • More systematic inclusion of issues concerning fragility in the political dialogue with fragile partner States.
  • Regular exchanges of risk analyses and relevant EU responses, at the field level and also at headquarters.
  • Mapping of bilateral and EU aid modalities with particular focus on the complementarity of CFSP/ESDP joint actions, the Instrument for Stability, the African Peace Facility and long-term cooperation instruments.
  • Review of assessment and analytical tools on governance, conflicts and disaster monitoring.
  • Improvement of the budget support mechanism, including through better coordination with international financial institutions.
  • Strengthening of the partnership with the United Nations and other multilateral organisations.

Related Acts

Council conclusions on EU response to situations of fragility. General Affairs and External Relations Council – 19 November 2007 [Not published in the Official Journal] (pdf ) (FR).

The Council approves, among other things, in the name of the EU, the “Principles for Good International Engagement in Fragile States and Situations” and calls on the Commission to present an implementation plan for the year 2009 based on its conclusions.