The future of Peace Operations - Security Council, 9991st meeting

The 9,991st meeting of the Secret Council is called to order. I should like to take this opportunity to pay tribute on behalf of the Council to His Excellency Mr. El Alfaro de Alba, Permanent Representative of Panama, for his service as President of the Council for the month of August. I'm sure I speak for all members of the Council in expressing deep, deep appreciation to Ambassador Alfaro de Alba and his team for the great diplomatic skill with which they conducted Council's business last month. I thank you, Mr. Ambassador. The provisional agenda for this meeting is maintenance of international peace and security, the future of peace operations, key issues, opportunities and challenges in the context of the review on the future of all forms of UN peace operations. The agenda is adopted. In accordance with Rule 37 of the Council's Provisional Rules of Procedure, I invite the representatives of Albania, Angola, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Cambodia, Canada, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Maldives, Malta, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, and Vietnam to participate in this meeting. It is so decided. In accordance with rule of 39 of the Council's Provisional Rules of Procedure, I invite the following briefers to participate in this meeting: Mr. Jean-Paul Lacqua, the Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations; Ms. Rosemary DiCaulo, on the Secretary General for Political and Peace Building Affairs. Mr. Thomas Zaneisen, Deputy Permanent Representative of Germany to the United Nations in his capacity as Chair of the Peace Building Commissions. And Ms. Jenna Russo, Director of Research and Head of Brian Uckart Center for Peace Operations, International Peace Institute. It is so decided. In accordance with Rule 39 of the Council's Provisional Rules of Procedure, I also invite His Excellency Mr. Stravos Lambrinidis, Head of Delegation of the European Union to the United Nations, to participate in this meeting. It is so decided. The Secret Council will now begin its consideration of item 2 of the agenda. I wish to draw the attention of Council members to document S/2025/547, a letter dated 2 September 2025 from the Charg d'affaires of the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Korea to the United Nations, addressed to the Secretary-General, transmitting a concept paper on the item under consideration. I now give the floor to Mr. Jean-Pierre Lacroix.

Thank you, Mr. President. I welcome this opportunity to brief the Security Council, and I thank the Republic of Korea, in coordination with Denmark and Pakistan, for organizing today's open debate. Let me first sincerely thank Member States, civil society, and others who contributed to the review on the future of peace operations. We have received more than 60 submissions. Each submission is being carefully reviewed. Extensive consultation and transparency underpin this review process. And along with our partner in this process, the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, we will continue to ensure opportunities for engagement in the coming months. When I spoke to this Council in July, I highlighted the important role peacekeeping missions play in supporting lasting political solutions to end conflict, as well as the indispensable role of the Security Council and the power it has when it speaks and acts collectively in support of a political process. Mr. President, peacekeeping is not a luxury. It is a lifeline for millions who count on it for a future without fear. Over 60,000 peacekeepers representing 150 members 15 member states bravely carry out its vital work in 11 missions, making peacekeepers one of the UN's largest and most visible activity in the field. I salute the women and men deployed in our missions who, on a daily basis, make a difference by protecting civilians, clearing mines and explosive remnants of war, patrolling villages and towns, monitoring ceasefires, and mediating conflict at the local level and preventing conflicts from spilling out of control. And I pay tribute to those peacekeepers who paid the ultimate price. As we look at the world, achieving lasting political solutions seems increasingly challenging. The level of active conflict has risen to alarming numbers with 61 active conflicts in 2024, the highest number since 1946, according to the Uppsala Conflict Data Program. Conflicts have become protracted, involving more actors and often proxy forces, making negotiated solutions more difficult to achieve. This does not mean we will not continue to pursue them. In such an uncertain future, we are likely to see more civilians at risk and in need of protection. It means the need for peace operations increases, potentially alongside other types of operations, including peace enforcement. It also means the context for deployment may be more uncertain and full success harder to achieve. Yet, as we have started the second quarter of the 21st century, Rather than retreat, we must use the expertise and the valuable lessons from nearly eight decades of peacekeeping to use this valuable tool to respond to the legitimate expectations that the peoples hold towards the fulfillment of the Charter. But we need not wait for the peace operations review to continue proactively doing our utmost to strengthen the effectiveness of UN peacekeeping. Before speaking further to what is needed for the future of peace operations, I would like to briefly convey a few examples of what we already achieved this year through our implementation of Action for Peacekeeping Plus or A4P Plus. First, peacekeeping missions continue to promote political solutions to conflict at the regional, national and local levels. In the Central African Republic, for example, MONUSCA is supporting the government to take forward the 19th of April agreement between the government and two signatory armed groups that return to the peace process by supporting disarmament and demobilization of the Retour, Reclamation, and Rehabilitation, that is 3R movement, and the Unite pour la Paix en Centrafrique, the UPC movement, thus marking a major milestone in the continuing peace process. Second, To improve mission planning, we recently endorsed new guidelines on mission concepts and mission plans. They are designed to improve clarity of strategy and enable missions to deliver on their mandates more effectively. Enhanced planning is critical to our effectiveness on the ground and only the more so in the context of the liquidity crisis and geopolitical uncertainty. Third, to ensure we have the right capabilities and mindset, we continue to take forward the Uniform Gender Parity Strategy, that is UGPS. All categories of personnel deployed in the field continue to meet their UGPS targets, except for military contingents, but we keep working on that particular category. Recognizing the importance of continuous improvement, we recently conducted a review of the UGPS strategy. The review identified priority actions to take forward, including expanding the network of uniformed women peacekeepers and supporting uniformed leadership cadres. I would like to take this opportunity to request that member states put forward more female candidates for senior military appointments. We are also refining and augmenting specialized training. The Triangular Partnership Programme, that is TPP, added new training modules on counter-IED and explosive hazards. TPP and the United Nations Mine Action Service, UNMAS, are also mainstreaming counter IED considerations across engineering and medical courses. And this is only one demonstration out of many of how far we have come in systematically mitigating the threat of explosive ordnance. This speaks to my fourth point on improving our accountability to peacekeepers, including to improve their safety and security. Peacekeeping operations often working with UNMAS are mitigating the risks of explosive ordnance to peacekeepers and local populations. In South Sudan, for example, UNMAS cleared approximately 220 anti-personnel mines, more than a dozen anti-vehicle mines, and nearly 500 cluster munitions, and over 5,200 other EO's in UNMAS's area of responsibility. These clearance operations freed up approximately 2.6 million square meters, including agricultural areas and key roadways for local communities. Fifth, we continue to do our utmost to uphold the highest standards of conduct and discipline. We continue pre-deployment training on conduct and discipline for all uniformed personnel, as well as in-mission training. We provide avenues for victims to come forward, investigate allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse, and when allegations are substantiated, we take the requisite action. From November 2024 to April 2025, that is the last six months, we repatriated 17 uniformed personnel on disciplinary grounds. And together with concerned member states, we have also actively sought solutions to address the too many pending paternity and child support claims. so that children fathered by peacekeepers and their mothers can have closure and assistance. Given time considerations, I do not want to be exhaustive in my remarks today on our most recent progress on strengthening peacekeeping. Rather, in the coming days, we will provide Member States with a comprehensive report on recent progress and challenges implementing A4P+. Mr. President, turning back to our vision for the future of peacekeeping, what I believe is required and what many of you have echoed during the consultation process is a UN that is capable and ready to respond through missions that are adaptable and tailored to the needs on the ground, guided by strong political strategies and leveraging the tools, capacities and expertise of the organization and its partners. Based on your submissions and in furtherance of the ongoing reform process of Action for Peacekeeping Plus, I would like to highlight the following. First, peace operations need to have clear and prioritized mandates. That is something that is often repeated, based on in-depth assessment of needs and commensurate resources and capabilities. The voice of host states, as well as other relevant stakeholders, including troop and police contributing countries, regional actors, and local communities, should be clearly reflected in the mandate. The availability and sources of data that can be brought together to more effectively assess situations on the ground and predict possible responses based on lessons learned has notably increased. We must harness the capacities of digital technologies and artificial intelligence to support the analysis of data as well as to assess the effectiveness of our responses through time. Pursuing political solutions to conflict, protecting civilians, supporting the strengthening of accountable governance entities, the promotion and protection of human rights, and the advancement of the women, peace, and security agenda should remain priorities. This must be accompanied by our sustained and uncompromising efforts to uphold the Secretary-General's zero-tolerance policy on SEA. UN peace operations are a manifestation of the Charter's purposes and principles to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war and to uphold the dignity and worth of the human person. Wherever our peace operations are deployed, even where we do not have an explicit protection mandate, populations rightly expect to be protected by the UN. This protection comes in many forms. from the presence and engagement by military or police peacekeepers to political dialogue, advocacy, and reporting by civilian staff, national and international alike. The UN's ability to deliver on the imperative to protect people is very often the benchmark by which we are judged. But we should not be indefinitely responsible for the protection of populations. This is why the pursuit of political solutions must remain at the heart of what we do and how we can more sustainably and cost effectively save succeeding generations from war. This reality carries important implications as we reflect on the future of all forms of peace operations, from how we plan, design, mandate, resource operations to how we implement their mandates on the ground. Second, we must continue working to demonstrate the difference we make on the ground through the results we deliver. We need to enhance how we monitor and report on the impact of peacekeeping, including wherever possible by identifying measurable targets. A4P+ monitoring, for example, is measuring and reporting on our efforts to improve the effectiveness of peacekeeping. Tools like the Comprehensive Planning Performance Assessment System, or CPAS, are also notable by measuring progress towards implementing Council mandates. But we must go further by conducting population-based perception surveys, which will bring us as close as possible to measuring impact through the systematic evaluation of the views of our beneficiaries. Actually, some missions have already engaged in those surveys. Third, conflicts are fluid situations and priorities and needs will change. Such changes must be monitored and analyzed on an ongoing basis by all stakeholders so that mission mandates and operations can change accordingly. This requires greater flexibility in how missions are managed and resourced, how they can use their resources, including from a UN resources point of view. Fourth, we recognize that complex situations such as the ones in which we operate require multi-faceted responses. This means that a multiplicity of actors might be needed to work in synergy to achieve the highest degree of impact, either because of different skills, capacities, and added value, or because of political rationales. Therefore, partnership, particularly with regional organizations and with the African Union where it concerns peace and security on the African continent, at the political operational level must remain high on the agenda, and the UN must maintain the core capabilities, relationships, and expertise to engage with a range of partners and in different capacities and contexts. These priorities will help prepare peacekeeping for the future, and they also align with the work stream under UNAT, where within the Secretariat, we are seeking efficiencies, reviewing the implementation of mandates, and exploring program realignment. To advance durable political solutions that enable peacekeeping to withdraw without a relapse into conflict requires the strong, unified, and ongoing support of this Council through the adoption of clear, prioritized mandates, active political engagement, and statements of support. These must be matched by the payment of assessed contribution in full and on time. Our ability to keep the peace requires it. So together, let us seize this moment to shape the peace operations that are fit for the future. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank Mr. LaCoix for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Rosemary DiCarlo.

Mr. President, thank you for convening this meeting on the review of UN peace operations mandated by the Pact for the Future. Since the Council last addressed this topic in July, we have continued our extensive consultations process. Over 40 Member States responded to our call for written inputs and offered ideas and reflections. More than 20 civil society organizations contributed inputs so far. This work continues with more engagements to come. One message is clear in these contributions. For eight decades, UN peace operations have been an essential instrument of multilateral action for peace. They have enabled the United Nations to deliver effective responses to critical peace and security challenges. They have saved lives. The spectrum of these operations is broad and diverse. It ranges from special envoys, regional offices, and expert panels supporting sanctions committees, to peacebuilding and electoral support initiatives. And it includes observer and verification missions and multidimensional peacekeeping operations that combine troops, police, and civilian capabilities. In many contexts, different types of missions have been co-deployed to provide the mix of peace support needed. Today, our missions operate in an environment marked by increasing geopolitical fragmentation. Conflicts have become more internationalized, with the involvement of global and/or regional actors influencing their internal dynamics. Meanwhile, non-state armed groups continue to proliferate. Many use terrorist tactics or espouse unclear political objectives, challenging traditional peacemaking approaches. New technologies, from AI to drones, are being weaponized on an industrial scale, increasing both the lethality of violence and the likelihood of escalation. And transnational drivers, such as organized crime, are now a regular facet of the conflict landscape. These trends have made peacemaking and conflict resolution harder to achieve today. Opinions diverge among Member States, especially within the Security Council and among host States, on how and to what end peace operations should be deployed and what the conditions are for their success. This is why a review on the future of UN peace operations is timely. Mr. President, to draw lessons for the future, we must learn from the past. Throughout its history, the United Nations has grappled with intractable conflicts and deep divisions. Special political missions have been at the forefront of the organization's response. From supporting decolonization in Libya and facilitating peace agreements in Central America to helping South Africa organize its first post-apartheid elections, These missions have supported close to 100 countries across all regions of the world. They have helped end wars. In Nepal, between 2007 and 2011, our mission helped transform a ceasefire between the government and the Communist Party of Nepal into a permanent, sustainable peace and political transition. They have allowed member states and the Security Council itself to find common ground and advance political solutions, even at times of high political tensions and deep ideological divisions. During the Cold War, for example, shuttle diplomacy by the Secretary-General's personal envoy for Afghanistan between Moscow, Washington, Islamabad, and Kabul led to indirect negotiations and eventually laid the ground for the 1988 Geneva Accords, which ended the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. In order to inform this review of peace operations, we've analyzed the history and practice of special political missions deployed since the creation of the United Nations. Their experiences revealed the following: First, Many of our missions were time-bound and targeted. The focus was on a political task without additional activities overextending the mission's mandate and focus. Second, most missions were nimble, easy to deploy, economical to maintain without major overheads and costs. Third, their mandates were often written concisely and directly, sometimes one or two sentences only in a Security Council resolution. They provided the missions with clear directions, but also a degree of flexibility in implementing them. Fourth, missions took great advantage of existing capabilities at headquarters, from senior officials to substantive experts. These were used as deployable assets, leveraging their political knowledge and diplomatic experience. And fifth, Missions were proactive in using the Secretary-General's good offices, both through his immediate office and that of his representatives and the UN Secretariat. Mr. President, based on our analysis of past deployments, recent UN reform efforts in peace and security, and consultations held thus far, we see three important priorities for designing special political missions today. First, Most of our missions today are deployed in the absence of a comprehensive peace agreement. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, peace agreements were the foundation for the work of peace operations. They encompass the ambitious commitments that conflict parties undertook across multiple areas, from electoral and constitutional processes to security sector reform and transitional justice. Our peace operations, in turn, could be equally ambitious as were, for example, our missions in Cambodia and Timor-Leste. Today, comprehensive peace agreements are the exception, not the norm. Our missions are often deployed in politically volatile situations, sometimes amid ongoing civil wars. In such situations, the initial goals of our mission should be more limited. such as preventing a deterioration of violence, achieving a ceasefire, or helping a fragile incipient peace process get off the ground. At the same time, they could retain the flexibility and adaptability to scale up and seize opportunities at a later stage to advance more ambitious political solutions. Second, we must continue to improve coordination between peace operations and United Nations country teams. We must build on the concerted efforts we have made over the years to strengthen the complementarity of our political, development, humanitarian, and human rights work. This is an all of UN endeavor, and different bodies, especially the Peacebuilding Commission, can play a critical role. And I'm confident that the 2025 review of the peacebuilding architecture will help us make additional gains. Third, The diversity of situations in which our missions are asked to deploy today means that it is essential for mandates to avoid one-size-fits-all approaches. Accordingly, the Secretariat must provide the Security Council with varied and realistic options for the design of new operations. For this purpose, we will examine how to further improve our planning capacities enhance creativity and innovation in reconfiguring our missions, inform mandate renewals, and improve transitions. Mr. President, there is one fundamental fact that no review, no matter how extensive or ambitious, can change. The failure or weak implementation of mandates is often related to the lack of political support for such operations. In the countries where they are deployed, among regional countries and sometimes in the Council itself. We will therefore need to engage with a laser-like focus on bringing the emphasis back to the political questions at the heart of each conflict and finding multilateral responses to them. We look forward to working with you to strengthen the effectiveness of our missions and to further enhance the trust in their work. Thank you.

I thank Ms. DiCarlo for her briefing. I now give the floor to Mr. Thomas Tzohaneisen.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, first of all, for convening this important meeting today. It is an honor to brief you today in my capacity as chair of the Peacebuilding Commission. I welcome this opportunity to reflect on how the Peacebuilding Commission has supported United Nations peace operations but also to highlight some of the best practices that demonstrate the added value of a peacebuilding perspective throughout the peace continuum. Over the past years, the PBC has provided a unique platform for supporting national-led and nationally-owned peacebuilding initiatives and projects for building consensus around them, for mobilizing necessary resources, and more generally, sustaining political attention for countries emerging from conflict. By convening a wide range of stakeholders, including regional organizations, international financial institutions, and regional development banks, alongside relevant UN entities, the PBC has sought together sustained political and financial support to host states throughout the implementation and the drawdown of peacekeeping and special political missions. In contexts such as Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Burundi, the Commission has facilitated close coordination between peacekeeping operations, UN country teams, international financial institutions, as well as regional actors. These experiences illustrate how the Peacebuilding Commission can help bridge the political, security, and development dimensions of peacebuilding by ensuring that transitions from mission settings to long-term UN engagements are inclusive nationally owned and sustainable. The Peacebuilding Commission's work has also demonstrated the importance of accompanying peace operations with peacebuilding assistance. In the Central African Republic, for example, the Commission has worked on peacebuilding priorities of the country by helping to ensure that security responses are complemented by institution building, reconciliation, and development strategies. The PBC has also served as a platform for coherence, linking peacekeeping to broader regional strategies and coordination efforts. In the DRC, following MONUSCO's withdrawal from Kasai and Tanganyika, the Peacebuilding Fund has contributed to the transition through projects investing in reconciliation and stabilization efforts. In line with their relevant strategies and action plans, both the PBC and the PBF put a particular emphasis or the inclusion of women and young people. Mr. President, allow me to emphasize three good practices that we encourage stakeholders to uphold. The first is on national ownership and inclusivity. This requires continuous support of nationally led and owned peacebuilding processes through engaging with all relevant stakeholders in order to ensure that peace operations are firmly anchored in national priorities and, following missions' departures, that national actors are adequately equipped to undertake the ensuing responsibilities. Second is partnerships and coherence. To strengthen a coherent UN system-wide peacebuilding response, a continued effort in promoting coordination between the Commission and the Security Council, but also with the General Assembly, ECOSOC, and regional organizations must remain a priority. Third and finally, the importance of sustained attention and resources. It is critical, we believe, that after the transition of a mission, situations are kept on the international agenda in order to avoid a relapse into conflict. Where appropriate and based on the consent of the country concerned, the Peacebuilding Commission stands ready to offer its contribution to sustained efforts beyond the life cycle of a mission. Mr. President, in concluding, integrating a peacebuilding perspective aims at ensuring that hard-won gains of peace operations can be preserved, while at the same time addressing root causes and drivers of conflict through inclusive governance, socioeconomic resilience, transitional justice, and reconciliation. As the Council considers the future of UN peace operations, Mr. President, I want to assure you the Peacebuilding Commission stands ready to contribute its political complement, convening power, and advisory role. By aligning peacebuilding efforts based on the principle of national ownership and leadership, we can, we believe, make peace operations not only more agile and tailored, but also more sustainable, effective, and impactful. I thank you.

I thank Mr. Jahanian for his briefing. I now give the floor to Ms. Jenna Russo.

Good morning, Excellencies. Thank you, Mr. President, for inviting the International Peace Institute to participate in today's discussion on the future of peace operations. I sometimes like to jest that throughout my nearly 17 years of working on UN peacekeeping, we seem to always be discussing how UN peace operations are at a turning point. However, this time, I think we really mean it. The last few years have presented the biggest inflection point we've seen since the 1990s. The combination of changing conflict dynamics, the UN's crisis of legitimacy in some field settings, geopolitics and financial constraints have required deep introspection and reconsideration of the role we want not only for peace operations, but for the broader UN peace and security pillar, and indeed the entire UN system. This process of reflection is important. We should question the way that peace operations work and their effectiveness in achieving the tenets of the Charter. At the same time, we are living in a liminal space that makes it difficult to plan for the future. At moments like this, it's important to remain tethered to the principles of the Charter and lessons from history that can help guide the way, even in the midst of many unknowns. Within this context, I want to offer three points of reflection related to UN peace operations and broader reform of the UN peace and security architecture, particularly in the light of the review on the future of all forms of UN peace operations. First, we should situate the current crisis within the broader history of UN peace operations. In 2022 and 2023, amidst the riots in the DRC and the closure of the mission in Mali, there were many voices predicting the end of UN peacekeeping. Some suggested that all robust uniform presences could simply be shifted to regional actors, and many have cited the fact that the UN has not deployed any new peacekeeping operations in more than a decade, and the number of UN peacekeepers deployed globally has declined. These factors are taken by some to mean the final demise of UN peacekeeping. Even among more moderate voices, there is a sense that large-scale missions have fallen out of favor and should be replaced by lightweight or modular approaches. However, in taking a broader historical view, it's important to note that UN peace operations have always been deployed in ebbs and flows, and the current decline we're seeing is neither unprecedented nor likely permanent. The UN has experienced declines in peace operation deployments at multiple points in its history, often due to crises in the field or growing contestation over the size or cost of missions or the ambition of mission mandates. After the UN deployed ONUK, its first mission to the Congo in the 1960s, member states reared back from peacekeeping, due in part to ONUK's size and cost and the ambition of its mandate. In the 23 years that followed, the Council only authorized five missions, four of which were continuations of previous missions. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the end of the Cold War ushered in a new wave of missions with 22 UN peace operations deployed. Yet, just a few years later, crises in Angola, Somalia, Rwanda, and Bosnia created a crisis of confidence in peacekeeping. The number of UN peacekeepers dropped from nearly 80,000 in 1994 to only 12,000 in 1999. The trend reversed again in the early 2000s with a new slate of missions and an eventual historical high in the number of peacekeepers deployed. In his analysis of the decline of peace operations in the 1970s and 1980s, Paul Williams attributes the trend to geopolitics, low levels of consensus within the council, divisions among the broader UN membership, financial crises, and a sense among some Western countries that the UN was becoming increasingly irrelevant, all factors that sound strikingly similar to today's dynamics. The lesson in this is that what we are facing is not unprecedented. To be sure, there are important differences between the dynamics of today and those of the 1980s. However, we must avoid a mindset of presentism in which we fail to consider broader historical trends and how they can help us to anticipate what may come in the future. Specifically, I would caution against deterministic thinking that supposes we have reached the end of one era of designing peace operations in favor of another. Even talk of reverting to so-called traditional forms of peace operations is ahistorical. as peace operations have never taken a single form. They have always been diverse and fluid, which is their strength and a sign of their adaptability. This lesson has important implications for UN80 and efforts to increase the UN's efficiency. In reforming the UN, policymakers must take care not to eliminate parts of the system that could be essential for addressing crises of tomorrow. One of the UN's comparative advantages is its strong institutional knowledge and ability to effectively backstop a range of tasks across the peace operations and peacebuilding spectrum. This capability is not matched by any other actor and it should not be discarded. Even if Member States decide to move in the direction of more targeted or narrow mandates, no two mandates will look exactly the same, and the Secretariat will continue to be required to support diverse and complex tasks like the protection of civilians, community engagement, security sector reform, monitoring and reporting, and electoral support. While it may indeed be the case that current dynamics necessitate a smaller UN, Any cuts or consolidation should be based on a careful analysis of the UN's unique added value across these areas vis-a-vis other partners, as well as the core capabilities required to maintain this value. The review on the future of peace operations could be one mechanism to help articulate these comparative advantages and the capabilities required to leverage them. Second, While UN reform and efforts to improve the practice of peace operations, including through the review, are no doubt necessary, it's important to be clear about what these efforts can and cannot achieve. One thing I have noticed over my time working on peace operations is that policymakers are often tempted to fill the wrong gaps or address existing problems with the wrong tools. Usually, this takes the form of member states trying to further improve the efficiency of peace operations to make up for political shortcomings. Peace operations may struggle to achieve their mandates because parties on the ground refuse to engage in a political process or because the Council fails to provide missions with the political backing that they need. Yet rather than grappling with these problems, there is an assumption that what peace operations need to succeed are things like new technologies, better peacekeeping training, or improved data collection. In other words, we're trying to use technical tools to solve political problems. Over the past few decades, peace operations have become remarkably professionalized, and to be sure, we should continue seeking opportunities to improve performance in the field. However, member states must take responsibility for their role in ensuring the success of peace operations and not simply pass the buck to peacekeepers, expecting them to overcome gaping political deficits. When it comes to UN 80 and efforts to reform the peace and security pillar, we can no longer ask peace operations to do more with less. That moment has passed. We must grapple with how to do less with less, or perhaps more optimistically, how to do differently with less. This requires vision, vision for what a smaller UN could achieve when it comes to maintaining international peace and security. Unfortunately, so far, the UN80 initiative does not seem to be guided by such a vision, and many member states have expressed reticence to undertake another long negotiation process following the Pact for the Future. Yet if member states do not articulate how they envision reform efforts, making the UN more effective, cuts will be arbitrary, lacking in strategy, or driven by bureaucratic and political interests. A vision to guide UN80 need not be created from scratch. Recent processes, including our common agenda, the new agenda for peace, the pact for the future, and the ongoing reviews on peace operations and the peace building architecture, all provide pieces that can form the basis of such a vision. At the International Peace Institute, we stand by ready to support member states in ensuring that the reform process helps to strengthen the UN's ability to serve the global community and uphold the Charter. Third, in the midst of political and financial pressures, some member states have begun suggesting that UN peace operations should get, quote, "back to basics." Is this a good idea? Yes and no. Yes, in the sense that the UN should recover and strengthen its use of preventive diplomacy. The UN's role in preventive diplomacy was first articulated by Dag Hammarskjold in 1960, and he used it to prevent and manage conflict, including through the deployment of peace operations. Many peacekeeping and special political missions continue to undertake this sort of political engagement on a day-to-day basis. But while Secretary-General Guterres called for a boost in preventive diplomacy and a greater use of good offices in the New Agenda for Peace, the UN has been absent or marginalized across many of today's most pressing crises. In past crises, it would have been unthinkable for the UN not to be at the table helping to broker peace. As IPI President Zaid Raad Al Hussein stressed in his briefing to the Council in July, what is needed is activated and inspired leadership to overcome political barriers, not only by the Secretary-General, but also by Member State diplomats and senior leaders. In this sense, we should return to basics and the approach taken by Hammarskjold, who, as Zaid said, never for a moment believed that there was no political role for the UN, nor thought he could not do anything because of geopolitical divisions. At the same time, the message of going back to basics is being instrumentalized by some to undermine the UN's work in areas like human rights, protection, and gender. Not only are these values at the heart of the UN Charter, but they are also strategically important to peace and the implementation of peace operations mandates. When missions fail to meet the needs of everyday individuals, they lose the trust of local communities and struggle to achieve their political objectives. As I said the last time I had the pleasure of briefing this Council, Broader peacebuilding activities like community engagement, strengthening state society relations, human rights, and gender are not simply nice to have. They are necessary to build sustainable peace. This does not mean that each of these tasks has to be implemented by UN peacekeepers, and finding ways to strengthen partnerships with the broader UN family and other actors is a step in the right direction. However, financial efficiency must not be used as an excuse to eliminate peacebuilding imperatives. To conclude, in today's climate, it is easy to feel lost amid all the challenges taking place. The fatigue of swimming upstream against an endless barrage of challenges can plant doubts that we are ever able to make a difference. So it's important to remember that for thousands of people, the presence of the UN can literally mean the difference between life and death. UN peace operations are a vital tool in collective security, and despite the current challenges, the UN can emerge from this moment stronger and better able to serve the global community. But it won't happen automatically. It requires vision, strong and creative diplomacy, and a relentless commitment to deliver on the Charter. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank Ms. Russo for her briefing. I now give the floor to those Council members who wish to make statements. I now give the floor to the representative of Greece.

Thank you, Mr. President. At the outset, I would like to congratulate the Republic of Korea for assuming the presidency of the Security Council for the month of September, and to commend you for convening today's timely debate in coordination with Denmark and Pakistan. I would also like to thank Under-Secretary-General Mr. LaCroix, Under-Secretary-General Ms. DiCarlo, The Deputy Permanent Representative of Germany in his capacity as Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Mr. Jan Neisen, and Director of Research of the International Peace Institute, Ms. Jenna Russo, for their very informative briefings. Mr. President, eight decades Since the first deployments, UN peace operations remain one of the most visible and effective tools of this Council to maintain international peace and security. They have saved lives, prevented escalation, and enabled political processes. Greece pays tribute to the men and women who serve under the UN flag and honors the memory of those who have fallen in the line of duty. Attacks against peacekeepers are unacceptable and a serious violation of Security Council resolutions and international law. Mr. President, I would like to highlight three points. First, as agreed in the Path of the Future, peace operations must adapt to better respond to existing challenges and new realities without compromising their core functions. This adjustment should be a critical element of the review on the future of peace operations. While over the years, mandates have come to include protection of civilians, human rights, women, youth, and even climate dimensions, the observation and monitoring of ceasefires remain at the heart of peacekeeping. This is what creates the space necessary for diplomacy to succeed. In this respect, Greece warmly welcomed the Council's unanimous renewal of UNFICIP's mandate earlier this year. This mission continues to play an irreplaceable role in maintaining stability on the island, de-escalating tensions in the buffer zone, and supporting the efforts of the Secretary-General and his personal envoy to resume negotiations in line with UN parameters. Greece also supported the renewal of UNIFIL's mandate. We consider the mission a reliable and critical partner of the Lebanese Government and a pillar of stability for Lebanon and the entire region. The transition of the mission needs to be safe and orderly and in close coordination with the host country. At the same time, the Council has a responsibility to address the repercussions emanating from ending the mandate and to ensure that it will not create a security vacuum. As a long-standing troop-contributing country, Greece remains committed to supporting these missions with qualified and gender-balanced personnel. In addition, the Pact of the Future rightly underscores the importance of maritime security as an integral component of international peace and security. Maritime insecurity, whether through illicit arms flows, trafficking, piracy, or attacks against commercial shipping, directly undermines fragile peace processes and often intersects with the mandates of UN operations from enforcing arms embargoes to ensuring humanitarian access. Addressing such threats requires close cooperation between United Nations peace operations, regional organizations, and coastal states. As a maritime nation, Greece strongly supports efforts to reinforce the maritime security dimension of peace operations, in line with the Pact's holistic and preventive approach. Second, innovation is essential to make peace operations more agile and effective. Technology, and artificial intelligence in particular, can provide tremendous possibilities for the enhancement of operational efficiency and the reduction of risks to personnel. But at the same time, we must guard against the misuse of such technologies to spread disinformation or undermine the credibility of peacekeepers. This was extensively discussed during last April's ARIA meeting, which was organized by Greece, France, and the Republic of Korea. Third, partnerships with host countries, local communities, and regional organizations is vital to the success of peacekeeping. In this respect, Greece strongly supports the strategic partnerships of the United Nations with the European Union. We also commend the contribution of the African Union and sub-regional bodies in conflict prevention, mediation and peacekeeping. Lastly, financial constraints should not compromise the core civilian and uniformed capacities of the missions. Neither should it weaken their safety and effectiveness. Elements like the protection of civilians, gender and human rights priorities are not optional add-ons, but the foundation of any lasting peace. Mr. President, as the review on the future of the UN peace operations unfolds, this Council has a responsibility to ensure that these missions remain fit for purpose. In the spirit of the Pact of the Future and the vision of UN80, Greece will continue to work in order to ensure that all UN peace operations are deployed in full respect of international law, including the UN Charter, international humanitarian law, and human rights law. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Greece for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Slovenia.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. First, I would like to express gratitude of our delegation for the leadership and wisdom of Ambassador Eloy Alfaro of Panama during Panamanian presidency in August. And I would also like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, Mr. President, and the Republic of Korea for assuming the presidency. I can assure you of our full cooperation and support. I would like to thank Under Secretary Lacroix, Under Secretary DeCarlo, as well as the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, and Ms. Rousseau for their really thought-provoking briefings and historic perspective. I would like to thank them for their commitment to peace operations, as well as for their injection of passion and realism for peace operations into today's debate. At the outset, we pay tribute to troop contributing countries and all peacekeepers for their tireless service in the cause of peace. We extend our deepest condolences to the families of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice. I thank the Republic of Korea for recognizing the importance to once again debate this issue in an open format. We commend the leadership of the Secretary-General and Under-Secretary-General Le Croux. Colleagues, there are more conflicts raging around the globe than ever before. They last longer. All of that in a period when divisions in this Council and in our international community are running deep. The review on the future of all forms of UN peace operations comes hence at a critical juncture. in times when keeping peace is more important than ever. All changes to the current peacekeeping infrastructure need to be done cautiously and attentively. So, Mr. President, let me elaborate this further in the three following points. First, agility and adaptability. Peace operations must be fit for purpose. For the sake of sustainability of the peace agreements, they need to be imposed. They cannot be imposed. If they are to be respected and in order to lead to rehabilitation and reconciliation of affected communities, they must be just and lasting, based on international law, and must ensure accountability. Mandates must be realistic, prioritized, and supported by resources adequate to meet their objectives. Protection of civilians must remain unequivocally at the core of our efforts. At the same time, peace operations must actively support political processes, strengthen security on the ground, and evolve to meet new challenges, from climate-related insecurity to the risks posed by emerging technologies. Investment in digital tools, early warnings, AI, drones, and data analytics is not optional. It is essential for effectiveness. Second, political primacy. No peace operation can substitute for inclusive, nationally owned political processes. Peacekeeping must be matched with diplomacy, mediation and prevention, backed by the Secretary-General's good offices. The Council must show unity of purpose and provide credible mandates. Inaction carries a cost, and it is civilians who pay it. In today's times, peace operations are often the critical lifeline for communities in conflict and essential support in maintaining peace and security in regions under strain. Third, coherence, credibility and sustainability. Peace operations, peacebuilding and sustainable development must reinforce one another. Any transitions must be carefully managed to avoid security vacuums. The UN 80 initiative should protect core capacities for rapid deployment. Credibility depends on the highest standards of conduct, accountability, and transparency. Financial sustainability is equally vital. Liquidity crises must not undermine mandates or the safety of personnel. Looking ahead, action for peacekeeping and A4P+ remain our compass, guiding us toward peace-centered, effective, and future-ready peace operations. Success will depend on clear objectives, ample resources, host country legitimacy, and unity within the Council. So, Mr. President, Slovenia will continue to engage constructively in this review. We see it as an opportunity to ensure that peace operations remain a central tool of this organization, true to the expectations of those we serve. And finally, I reaffirm Slovenia's unwavering commitment to multilateralism, including as both a troop and police contributor. Our engagement reflects our belief in collective action for peace, security and human dignity. We will continue to support efforts to adapt peace operations to today's realities and tomorrow's challenges, with the Security Council's leadership playing a decisive role. Thank you.

I thank the representative of Slovenia for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Guyana.

Thank you, Mr. President. And at the outset, I congratulate you and the Republic of Korea on the assumption of the presidency this month and commend Panama on a successful presidency in August. Mr. President, I thank you for convening today's open debate, providing an opportunity for the entire UN membership to engage on this important topic. Today's meeting comes at an opportune time as we reflect on the progress made since the adoption of the Pact for the Future and look ahead to the UN80 initiative. I thank USG's LaCroix and DiCarlo, Ms. Jenna Russo, and Ambassador Zanesin for their comprehensive and informative briefs. Mr. President, having been a troop-contributing country and witnessed firsthand the positive impact of UN peace operations, Guyana acknowledges the decades of success of UN peace operations in shortening conflicts, protecting civilians, and preventing spillover of crises. However, we must also take stock of the complex and multifaceted challenges that define today's security landscape and which sometimes transcend borders. The operating environment for the UN peace operations is itself often marred by asymmetric threats, mis- and disinformation, hostile national armed forces, organized crime, and the effects of climate change. Consequently, UN peace operations must be more adaptable and resilient than ever before. Moreover, agility and efficiency must never be achieved at the expense of core, non-negotiable mandates: the protection of civilians, including children, the promotion of human rights, and the full implementation of the Women, Peace and Security agenda are not ancillary functions. They are the very essence of our collective efforts to build sustainable peace and must therefore be part of the core peacekeeping operations. These priorities are strategically and politically necessary for the mission's long-term success. We must therefore ensure that they are maintained across all types of missions, even those with smaller footprints. Mr. President, Guyana is of the firm belief that prevention is not only more humane, but also more cost-effective than intervention. As such, we must place greater emphasis on the Pacific settlement of disputes, and UN peace operations must be adequately equipped to support conflict resolution efforts utilizing preventative diplomacy, mediation, and other dialogue-intensive efforts. The success of peace operations should be measured not just by their ability to manage conflict, but by their capacity to prevent it from erupting or escalating. Peacekeeping missions must be fully equipped and mandated to support and facilitate political processes. Furthermore, the integrity and performance of our missions are directly linked to their financial stability. It is imperative that we find a sustainable solution to the recurring liquidity crisis that threaten to impact mandates, operational priorities, and the safety and credibility of our peacekeepers. We cannot ask our uniformed and civilian personnel to risk their lives without providing them with the necessary resources and support. We therefore encourage all Member States to be principled in their financial support to UN peace operations. As we engage in the ongoing review on the future of all forms of UN peace operations, Guyana stands ready to contribute constructively to the conversation. We believe in the primacy of politics, protection of civilians, cooperation with host countries, and other principles of action for peacekeeping and the action for peacekeeping plus, which aim to make missions more effective, safer, and better equipped, and share the view that these can serve as steadfast guideposts. Let us work together to ensure that our peace operations are not only fit for current challenges, but are also robust, agile, and well-equipped to meet the crises of tomorrow. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Guyana for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Algeria.

Thank you, President. At the outset, I wish to express our sincere congratulations to Panama for the successful presidency during the month of.

August.

I also wish to convey our full support to the Republic of Korea for its presidency during this very difficult month of September. And also, to commend the Republic of Korea for convening this important debate and convey my appreciation to USG DiCarlo and USG Lacroix, and the representative of Germany, for their briefings. I also thank Mrs. Gennaruso for her presentation. I seize this opportunity to pay tribute to the Blue Helmets and express Algeria's gratitude for their tremendous sacrifices. President, we are at a crucial phase for UN peace operations due to a changing security landscape and challenging times for our organization. Last year, The Pact of the Future has set the tone through the request of a review of all forms of peace operations. And we reiterate our call for an inclusive consultation process to produce a comprehensive review that paves the way for adapting for adaptable, effective and fit-for-purpose peace operations. In this regard, I wish to underline the following three points. First, mandate. Mandate is the key word. Its setting phase has to respond to a number of considerations to fulfill the expected requirements. The starting point could be in the mandate renewal resolutions that this Council adopts on a regular basis, with sometimes, with too often, minor technical adjustment. This exercise should not be undertaken in disconnection with the situation on the ground and with the current efforts to improve the performance of UN peace operations. Also, the impartiality of the pen holder and his ability to go beyond his national perception on the file beforehand are essential. Being a penholder on a file under which a UN peace operation is deployed implies a particular responsibility to reflect the views of all members, thus contributing to a durable solution to the conflict on the agenda of the Council. However, moving away from this responsibility would undermine the collective efforts of the international community and multilateralism as a whole. Furthermore, setting the mandate of UN peace operation in the current context requires a great sense of adaptation to respond to the new realities on the ground. The new nature of threats differs completely from the traditional perception of security challenges and crisis on which the presence of UN peace operation was built, where these UN operations were deployed to create buffer zones, separating two regular armies. We are currently facing different challenge with hybrid threat. Second, President, we believe in the power of partnerships. The implementation of the letter and spirit of Chapter 8 of the UN Charter is necessary, particularly in the current context of reform and review. However, we will need to show some ability to innovate more and to go beyond the lines we drew through the past years, the past decades, and put in place multidimensional partnerships. And we reiterate our call for more enhanced partnerships, first, with the host countries to strengthen the national ownership, and second, especially with regional actors, and in our case, with the African Union. The African Union should not be perceived only as a cheap contributing military actor, but rather as a strategic political partner. Partnerships could also be set through trilateral mechanism where member states can put at the disposal of the United Nations, as well as troops and police contributing countries, their national experiences. In this regard, I reiterate my country's readiness to work with the UN and with troop and police contributor country in the field of capacity building and experience sharing, as announced during the last ministerial conference on peacebuilding in Berlin. In this context, it is worth noting that My country, Algeria, has trained during the last decade more than 17,000 African officers from more than 30 African countries. Third, cost-effectiveness. Cost-effectiveness has to be our key word. The current financial challenges we are facing should be perceived as an opportunity, as a catalyst for reform to improve the performance of peace operations. We need, in this regard, to make a clear distinction between cost-effectiveness, prioritizing resources, and discriminate budget cuts. Cost-effectiveness should not be equated with doing less. Rather, it should mean doing better, delivering more strategic, focused, and result-driven missions. with the resource at hand. Cost-effectiveness comes also through more investment, more investment in prevention, in mediation, and in good offices. It comes through investment in a viable political project around which the presence of a UN peace operation should be designed with a clear end state. President, to conclude, UN peace operations remain as an essential tool to maintain international peace and security, our mandate. They represent a clear expression on how multilateralism can contribute in stabilization and conflict resolution efforts. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Algeria for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of United States.

Thank you, Mr. President. And let me congratulate you on assuming the presidency. I'd also like to thank Under Secretary-General Lacroix, Under Secretary-General DeCarlo, Ambassador Zane Eason as PBC Chair, and General Russo from IPI for your briefings and insights today. The United Nations has a unique role in addressing many of today's most difficult and sensitive conflicts. but UN peace operations today struggle with a system that is in need of reform and reprioritization. The United States therefore continues to advocate UN return to its foundational purpose of maintaining international peace and security. In other words, we need to get back to basics. As part of these larger UN reform efforts, UN peacekeeping in particular must be more accountable, adaptable, and transparent. In doing so, the UN will be better able to exercise its comparative advantages, including by deploying multinational, tailored, targeted solutions to address peace and security problems. First, to improve accountability, excellence in performance must be better rewarded and incentivized. At the same time, expedient and consistently applied consequences must also be imposed. including for performance failures, conduct and discipline issues, resource mismanagement, inaction in the face of impediments to missions mandates, and non-intervention when imminent threat of physical violence against civilians arise. Reform should ensure the UN has clear and consistent performance standards for both uniformed and civilian personnel and transparent accountability mechanisms that are used to address underperformance in the efficient execution of mandates. Similarly, both individual perpetrators, sorry, as well as TCC and PCCs must be held to account for instances of sexual exploitation and abuse as appropriate without political consideration. Second, To increase transparency, UN headquarters, in cooperation with peace operations at the mission level, must engage in integrated planning. This includes both headquarters level scenario planning, as well as integrated military and civilian mission planning. These efforts will ensure UN peace operations have actionable end states and timeliness. clear and demonstrable metrics to achieve these end states and a streamlined support structure that both fosters innovation and responsibly allocates shared resources. Missions must be able to showcase their progress and activity collectively, work themselves out of a job. To support transparency, Reforms are needed to ensure clear mandates articulate a desired goal or end state, prioritize available resources, and provide the flexibility for mission leaders to determine how best to achieve those goals based on dynamics on the ground. Reforms are also needed to ensure the Council is provided with regular, frank assessments and realistic recommendations, not just what it wants to hear. These efforts to increase transparency are necessary so all members can see a concrete, measurable return on our investment. Third, to empower adaptability, peace operations need to reflect the political and operational realities of the moment. These include the need for clear and focused mandates, tasks, and support structures, which will help gain buy-in and make efficient, sorry, significant contributions to diffusing and resolving conflict through peace operations. Targeted and achievable mandates, rather than burdensome mandates, will also help address the growing trust deficit facing peace operations today. Reforms for adaptability can include the modular approaches suggested in the DPO's recent study on the future of peacekeeping, which would help ensure peace operations are focused, nimble, and context-specific. This can also be accomplished through adaptive planning, structural changes that support flexibility, and incentives for thoughtful risk-taking rather than an acceptance of the status quo. In conclusion, Mr. President, the United States remains concerned about the UN's bureaucratic inefficiencies, politicized initiatives, and burdensome mandates that inhibit clear prioritization and strain resources. President Trump is steadfast in his goal of restoring peace across the world. And President Trump also has made clear the UN needs to focus on its core mandate to better position it for success. That is why we continue to advocate for significant reforms to the UN, including through the review on all forms of peace operations. Progress in responding to this pivotal time and the transformation of the UN will require broad political backing, operational wherewithal, and visionary leadership. We must be ready to meet the moment. Thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the representative of United States for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Denmark.

Thank you, Mr. President. And I once again congratulate the Republic of Korea for assuming the presidency of the Council and thank Panama for an excellent presidency in August. Mr. President, one year ago, world leaders convened in New York to adopt the Pact for the Future. It was a moment of hope and determination, driven by a collective recognition to adapt our institutions including UN peace operations, to the challenging realities of our time. Today's debate is an important step in achieving this objective. So let me commend the Republic of Korea for convening this timely open debate as a continuation of the trio initiative with Denmark and Pakistan. Let me also thank USG Lacroix, USG DiCarlo, Ambassador Sandison, and Dr. Rousseau for their briefings and recommendations. Mr. President, UN peace operations represent multilateral solidarity at its finest. Around the world, communities offer their most precious resources, their people, in support of peace. This is the promise of the UN Charter in action. Today, however, this promise is challenged like never before. As we engage in the review process, as well as the UN80, we strongly believe that we cannot do so as a routine exercise. We must view it strategically and grasp it as an opportunity to rethink and recommit. Allow me to address three critical areas. First, on the matter of mandate design. In March, we heard strong calls for mandates that are clear, focused, and achievable. Mandates that played the protections of civilians at their core. But building peace is not a serious game. The need for precision and protection must not come at the expense of long-term and inclusive peacebuilding. Political engagement, institution building, transitional justice, the promotion of protection of human rights, and the advancement of the WPS agenda are not optional, they're fundamental. Mandates must therefore both be context-specific and sequenced to adapt to evolving conflicts and needs. Strategic assessments by the UN are key to achieving this. Second, Mr. President, in the context of an increasingly complex landscape, we must safeguard and strengthen the core capacities that allow peace operations to respond in an integrated, swift, and effective manner. These include not only uniformed personnel and logistics support, but also critical civilian expertise in political affairs, mediation, rule of law, gender, climate security, and digital technology. Planning capacity across civilian, military, and police components is essential. Without this, approaches become siloed, accountability is unclear, and mandate implementation is hindered. We urge the UN to invest more in developing and institutionalizing an integrated planning process across all peace operations. Such capacities and planning will help peace operations operate in a changing environment, where peace is not linear, where needs change and responses need to change with them. Third, Mr. President, the peaceful settlement of disputes lie at the heart of the UN Charter. We believe the same should apply for UN peace operations. From early warning and the facilitation of dialogue to support for local inclusive peace processes, as well as women's participation, these aspects should be prioritized, empowered, and importantly, resourced. Similarly, we urge the Secretary-General to boldly use his good offices to invest in mediation and to take risks. This Council can reinforce these efforts. We should encourage missions to work closely with regional organizations, such as the African Union. We should also regularly listen to the advice by the Peacebuilding Commission, which can bring a variety of perspectives. We should not be afraid to adapt our responses. Mr. President, to conclude, The future of UN peace operations must be shaped by both ambition and realism. We cannot solve every problem, but we can and must remain credible actors for peace. This Council holds the tool to shape mandates and support missions with the resources they require. What is needed is the political will and the courage to do so. Let us seize this opportunity to ensure that UN peace operations remain fit for purpose. Denmark looks forward to working with all Council members, including our trio partners, to this end. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Denmark for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of China.

Thank you, President. President, I congratulate the Republic of Korea on assuming presidency for the Council this month. I also congratulate Panama on its smooth completion of his presidency last month. China commends the Republic of Korea, Denmark, and Pakistan for jointly convening this meeting. We thank USG Jean-Pierre Lacroix, USG Rosemary DiCarlo, and Ambassador Thomas Zaneson for their briefings. I have also listened attentively to the recommendations made by Ms. Jenna Russo. Peace operations are an innovative practice of multilateralism a powerful tool for the United Nations to contain conflicts and shape peace. The world today is fraught with upheavals and turmoil. Regional instabilities arise thick and fast, and deficits in peace, security, and governance are growing. All these have posed unprecedented challenges to peace operations. The United Nations should not be content with the status quo in its peace efforts. Rather, we must make effective use of the ongoing independent review of peace operations, thoroughly learn from past experiences and lessons, and work together to advance the transformation, upgrading, and better quality and efficiency of peace operations. I wish to make four points. First and foremost, we must focus on the core mandate and political objectives. Peace operations are a means, not an end. They must serve a clearly defined political process and create favorable conditions for a political solution. Peace operations are not a panacea either. The Security Council should prepare for each peace operation a clear, practical, and prioritized mandate. and make adjustments as the situation evolves. The Council should also set out a clear and feasible exit strategy for peace operations in a timely way. This process, this strategy, however, is primarily determined by the will of the country concerned and the situation on the ground, and should not be held hostage to the policies of any individual country, or to be adopted or abandoned Second, the performance of peace operations must be fully enhanced. The efficient use of resources is the very duty of peace operations A culture of efficiency should be promoted throughout the entire process. Effective planning is essential across areas such as logistics, finance, and procurement. Better integration of resources and reduced overlapping investments are needed to make the funds more cost effective. Strict financial discipline must be enforced to prevent the waste of funds and ensure accountability. In procuring supplies, it is essential to broaden the supply chain and pursue greater cost effectiveness and transparency. The success of peace operations hinges on stable, predictable and sustainable funding. Every member state is obligated to pay its UN dues and peacekeeping assessments in full. Third, strengthen partnerships for peace operations. Strong support from host countries is a crucial prerequisite for the success of peace operations. Special missions must respect the sovereignty and ownership of host countries, maintain good cooperation with them, and earn the recognition of their governments and people. This will lay a solid foundation for the smooth implementation of their mandates. Troop and police contributing countries, host countries, the peace-building commission, and regional organizations should fulfill their respective roles, complement each other's strengths, and collectively contribute to the effectiveness of peace operations. China supports African solutions to African issues. We look forward to the early operationalization of the framework arrangements set out in Security Council Resolution 2719 to provide sufficient, predictable, and sustainable funding for the AU-led peace operations. Fourth, the safety and security of peacekeepers must be effectively guaranteed. In recent years, peacekeepers have faced increasingly grim security risks. The entire UN system must improve its emergency response mechanisms to minimize casualties. China supports the Secretariat and the missions in continuing to implement Council Resolution 2518, strengthening capacity building in areas such as situational awareness, reconnaissance and surveillance, and medical evacuation. This will provide peacekeepers with comprehensive, multi-tiered security guarantees. Attacks against peacekeepers must not go unpunished, and accountability mechanisms should be put in place and improved later on, and host countries should be supported in their best efforts to investigate and bring the perpetrators to justice. President, As a major troop contributor and the second largest financial contributor to UN peacekeeping, China has consistently supported UN peace operations with concrete actions. Recently, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed the Global Governance Initiative, or GGI for short, which emphasizes the importance of adhering to sovereign equality, abiding by international rule of law, practicing multilateralism, advocating the people-centered approach, and focusing on real results. This initiative offers Chinese wisdom and Chinese solutions to address the global governance deficit. Guided by the GGI, China will continue to actively support and participate in UN peace operations, and work with all parties to make unremitting efforts to safeguard international peace and security. I thank you, President.

I thank the representative of China for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Panama.

I would like to thank the President and other distinguished colleagues for their kind comments congratulating me on my management of the Security Council in the month of August, and I very much appreciate this praise, which isn't perhaps always due. I'd like to thank the Republic of Korea for organizing this meeting, and the briefers, Monsieur Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Rosemary DeCarlo, Thomas Zaneisen, and Jenna Russo for their briefings. The ministerial conference in Berlin and recent dialogue and research, including the peacebuilding architecture review, show just how essential it is that we concentrate on adapting peacekeeping operations to all of the new challenges that exist on the ground. These challenges include the rise in extremism, the speeding up of climate change, very many times intentionally brought on as a result of the fight for natural resources, the use of algorithms as a weapon of impunity in elections as well as a weapon of war. Each of these challenges must be addressed in coordination with all actors involved, and this must be done immediately. We must take into account science and expert research, which closely follow the new dynamics and the developments in challenges on the ground with regard to peacekeeping operations. And this suggests that we should focus on the people that we serve. This developing situation gives us the opportunity to review the efficiency and reform those practices that are now outdated. They should be updated and adapted depending upon their respective mandates. To operationalize all of this requires a strengthening international cooperation together with the private sector, international financial institutions, and development banks, with close cooperation with local authorities, the communities that we serve, and regional organizations. These new alliances should be used to build trust amongst everyone. We support countries in the creation and implementation of their national prevention strategies. Let us ensure funding in order to guarantee education for peace that is based on the protection of and respect for human rights, gender equality, and the robust defense of democracy. As members of the Peacebuilding Commission, And based on our principles, we will continue to promote peacebuilding in military and political transitions. This is why we call for more women and young people to be included at local level in processes of mediation and preventive diplomacy. At the end of the day, it is them, they that will be responsible for building and sustaining peace over time. We also feel that operations should include a comprehensive perspective of the countries affected. This should efficiently address those needs that the affected parties implore us to take into consideration during each and every one of our meetings with them. We recognize the independent study on the future of peace operations, which proposes a roadmap to be followed. And that's why we call upon all member states to invest once again in the United Nations and to provide additional resources to guarantee the operation of the 30 new models proposed. This will make it possible to move towards a new geopolitical era. We are concerned at disinformation and the current trend whereby many countries are withdrawing from agreements which committed them to peace in order to rearm themselves and increase their investment in military expenditure in order to face certain threats which they feel they are facing. In the meantime, humanitarian tragedies continue. President, let us continue to build and extend bridges in order to overcome polarization. We support the political solutions that will adapt operations to new realities, such as the multilateral system that is developing and address the rise in certain actors who use algorithms, AI, as weapons of war with impunity, or those that attempt to use climate change to extract critical minerals to the detriment of the common good. President, the future of peace operations requires willingness and participation. We must be prepared to innovate and be convinced that financial contributions are key to the success of the implementation of the new models. Thank you very much.

I thank the representative of Panama for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Pakistan.

President, we congratulate the Republic of Korea on assuming the presidency of the Council. And we thank you for convening this debate, which Pakistan is pleased to co-sponsor together with Denmark, our peacekeeping trio partner. Peacekeeping is the UN's greatest success story, but today, just like UN, it is under siege. Starved of resources, constrained in mandates and shrinking in presence. It risks becoming a casualty of political neglect and geopolitics. But we cannot let one of multilateralism's most effective tools be sidelined by inaction. We are all stakeholders in its success, and we must act to not only preserve but to make this instrument even more relevant and fit for purpose and fit for future, corresponding to the diverse challenges in the domain of peace and security. That is why this continuing debate inside and outside the Security Council is so important. And we thank Under-Secretary-General Jean-Pierre Lacroix and Under-Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo for their detailed briefings and important work. And we also appreciate Ambassador Zaneson and Ms. Russo for their valuable insights. President, UN peace operations are facing another period of crisis. Conflicts are multiplying, as we are told, yet UN's response is dwindling. No new mission has been deployed since 2014. Several have closed or drawn down, and those that remain struggle with financial and operational constraints that threaten mandate delivery. This is a dangerous paradox the world cannot afford. This has also created a crisis of confidence. The Secretary-General's review on the future of peace operations is therefore timely and essential to restore faith in this indispensable tool for peace and security. Peacekeeping success is undeniable, from Cambodia and Timor-Leste to Sierra Leone, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire, Burundi, and elsewhere. Pakistani blue helmets have contributed and have been witness to many of these success stories. Strong support shown at the 2025 Berlin Peacekeeping Ministerial confirmed that member states remain committed to UN peace operations. Yet, endorsement must translate into action. Pakistan has consistently stressed the primacy of politics, tailored mandates, the peace continuum, the prevention and peacebuilding dimensions, and the importance of strong partnerships for more effective peacekeeping. Today, I wish to highlight six priorities. First, we must confront resource constraints. And we have to be candid. With a budget of just $5.4 billion, which is less than 0.2% of global military spending, Peacekeeping remains the most cost-effective instrument of peace. Yet liquidity crisis and delayed payments erode credibility and create dangerous vacuums. Assessed contributions must be paid in full and on time. Efficiency drives such as UNAT should enhance performance without hollowing out essential uniformed and civilian capacities. Second, The protection of civilians must remain central. This principle arose from the UN's darkest failures in Rwanda and Srebrenica. Yet today, resource scarcity is cited to justify backsliding. Protection of civilians is not optional. It is both a moral duty and a strategic necessity. Mandates must be strengthened. resourced and backed by accountability of mission leadership. Third, the troop and police contributing countries which shoulder the burden in the field remain unfortunately mostly excluded from crucial decisions. This divide between mandate drafters and mandate implementers must end. Structured consultations with troop and police contributing countries at every stage are vital to mission success. Fourth, the safety and security of peacekeepers must be ensured. Accountability to peacekeepers must be real. Attacks on them must be investigated and prosecuted to create deterrence. And fifth, peace operations must support peaceful settlement of disputes and address root causes. Missions should be empowered to sustain ceasefires, deter escalation, and foster dialogue, including through the Secretary-General's good offices and preventive diplomacy. The value of UN presence is even more in complex environments. It also provides transparency, restraint, and legitimacy in volatile contexts. This reaffirms the broader principle that peacekeeping is not only about managing conflicts, but also about upholding international legitimacy and preventing escalation of unresolved disputes. Finally, peacekeeping must evolve, not retreat. Missions should responsibly adopt new technologies, address climate-related security risks, deploy more women peacekeepers, and engage local communities. They must be designed with clear priorities, achievable tasks, and credible leadership. Obviously, there is no one-size-fits-all in peace operations. We should continue to optimally draw on the wide range of possibilities from special political to peacekeeping missions as appropriate, and we should be able to do that while conforming to the UN Charter and learning from the history and unique experience of UN peacekeeping, as many of our briefers also noted today. Mr. President, for over seven decades, Pakistan has stood firmly with the United Nations in the cause of peacekeeping. We also host one of the oldest UN missions, the United Nations Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan, deployed in Jammu and Kashmir. More than 250,000 Pakistanis have served in 48 missions, often in the most difficult environments. The sacrifice of 182 of our peacekeepers is a testament to our enduring commitment to the Charter and to multilateralism. We salute all UN peacekeepers, past and present. Peace operations form the core of this Council's work. These are proven, effective instruments of peace. We must protect and strengthen them by investing strategically in their long-term success. The Security Council and the wider UN membership must provide the full political backing and adequate resources for this endeavor, which indeed is a test of our collective resolve to maintain international peace and security. If we stand as one, as the Secretary-General noted a while ago in the General Assembly today, we will succeed. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Pakistan for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of France.

Mr. President. I congratulate you at the beginning of your presidency, and I welcome the Permanent Representative of Panama and congratulate him on the presidency for last month. I thank Under-Secretary-General M. Jean-Pierre Lacroix, Under-Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo, Deputy Permanent Representative of Germany and Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Mr. Thomas Zanneisen, as well as Madame Gena Russo from the International Peace Institute for their statements. France is committed to peace building. We support it politically, financially, and as a troop and equipment contributor, and through multiple training activities. I'd like to emphasize three points. First of all, peacekeeping has demonstrated its effectiveness. The United Nations has indisputable legitimacy and a unique ability to generate and project power. Improving mission performance must enable the full implementation of their mandates and enhance the safety of blue helmets. France reiterates its commitment to effective multilateralism, of which peacekeeping is one of the main instruments of concrete action for peace and international security. The successes of peacekeeping are many. Sierra Leone, seated at this table, can testify to this. Liberia, which will be seated here next year as well. In Cambodia, Namibia, Timor-Leste and elsewhere, the United Nations has contributed to the return of peace. Moreover, the benefits of peacekeeping continue to be demonstrated in very many situations. In a difficult context and despite hindrances, MONUSCO continues to play an indispensable role in protecting civilians. It saves the lives of civilians threatened by armed groups in the areas where it operates in the east of the country. It is the only international force still present in the country, and it has the capacity and legitimacy necessary to contribute to the implementation of peace agreements when the time is right, notably through the verification of ceasefires. MINUSCA, through effective cooperation with the government of the Central African Republic and its armed forces, has made significant progress in extending state authority and in improving security. These Advances, which must be consolidated, benefit the civilian population, which it helps to protect, as well as the stabilization of the region. UNIFIL has achieved significant results on the ground since the ceasefire was signed in November of 2024. It supports the deployment of the Lebanese Armed Forces in their mission to restore the state's monopoly on arms and Lebanese state authority throughout the whole country. The recent unanimous renewal of its mandate through resolution 2790 will allow it to continue its operations for 16 months and support the strengthening of the Lebanese armed forces. For peacekeeping to be effective, there must be a strong commitment on the part of the Member States and the United Nations overall. Missions require the necessary resources that are adapted to the imperatives of their mandates and the realities on the ground. All Member States must pay their mandatory contributions in full and on time. France calls on everyone to act responsibly. Political objectives must dictate the resources allocated to missions and not the other way around. This Council must live up to the responsibility conferred upon it by the Charter namely guaranteeing peace and international security. Deploying peacekeeping operations is an instrument which serves political objectives within a clear and robust framework. Their success depends on the political will of Council members, which is sometimes lacking. Mr. President, peacekeeping is not a panacea. It can and it must adapt to contemporary challenges and become more efficient. France therefore supports reform efforts, particularly within the framework of the Pact for the Future and UN 80. It honours the courage of peacekeepers and the memory of those who made the ultimate sacrifice. History shows that the Security Council can achieve many things, provided that it give itself the means to match its ambitions. We must ensure that we do not organize ourselves in a way that will lead to our own powerlessness or sabotage our capacity for action. France remains determined to act in accordance with the spirit of the Charter. Thank you.

Thanks for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Somalia.

Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Republic of Korea for assuming the presidency for the month of September. You can count on our support. I also would like to thank Panama for their able way in which they steered the Council's work last month. I commend the Republic of Korea for convening this crucial open debate on the future of peace operations in collaboration with Denmark and Pakistan as the trio. I thank USG LaCrosse, USG DeCarlo, and the Chair of Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Zain Hasan, for their valuable insights, and appreciate the contribution to Ms. Roso to the discussion today. I take this opportunity to honor the sacrifices of UN peacekeepers who have lost their lives in the line of duty, and to recognize their legacy in the lives they touched and the peace they worked to build around the world. Mr. President, African perspective is shaped by its direct experience as a host of peacekeeping missions, a troop-contributing region, and a continent that understands the critical importance of effective peace operations intimately. We have seen both the positive impacts and the limitations of these missions. As we gather one year after the adoption of the Pact of the Future, Nowhere is in need of adaptation more evident than in Africa, where the complexity of the conflict demands innovative approaches. For nearly eight decades, UN peace operations have proven their worth as indispensable tool for maintaining international peace and security. Yet, today's conflicts demand that we honestly assess how these operations can become more agile, tailored, and effective in addressing the current and future challenges. First, in our experience, the success of UN peace operations depends on two interlinked principles: clear strategic planning and operational adaptability. Each mission must have well-defined objectives and clear exit strategy from the beginning, designed to accommodate the dynamic nature of the conflict situation. What begins as a peacekeeping mission may require a swift transition to peace enforcement or conversely a rapid shift toward peace-building initiatives. Second, we must prioritize the development of the security and development nexus. It's impossible to achieve sustainable and lasting peace without addressing the underlying root causes of the conflict, in particular, inequalities and underdevelopment. This is why we strongly advocate for the increased nationalization of UN posts and prioritization of local procurements. This strategy builds sustainable local capacity and positively contributes to the mission's responsiveness and legitimacy on the ground. Investing in local economies in post-conflict setting is not just about operational efficiency, it's a direct investment in peace building and reversing the despair that fuels the conflict. Third, as we consider the UN aid initiatives and potential reforms, We must be vigilant that the financial constraints do not undermine the essential capacities needed to respond effectively to peace and security crises. Member States must commit to a predictable, adequate and timely funding that enables Missions to fulfill their mandates without compromising on the quality or the safety. Fourth, we welcome the renewed focus on strengthening the peace operations role in mediations, preventive diplomacy, and utilizing the Secretary-General as a good offices. Sustainable peace requires inclusive political solution that prioritize dialogue, reconciliation, and genuine national ownership of the peace process. Fifth, Africa's Silencing the Gun initiative exemplifies the commitment to breaking the cycle of the conflict and building a sustainable peace. We must strengthen system-wide cooperation, particularly through AU-UN hybrid operations. We must build on the historic adoption of the Security Council Resolution 2719 to reinforce the UN-AU partnership. This includes ensuring predictable and sustainable financing for African Union-led peace support operations and enhancing coordination mechanisms. Mr. President, as we look toward the completion of the Secretary-General's review, we emphasize that the guiding principles of Action for Peacekeeping and Actions for Peacekeeping Plus must remain central to our reform efforts. The review presents an unprecedented opportunity to reshape UN peace operations for contemporary challenges, but this transformation must be guided by the experiences and needs of those most directly affected by the conflict. In closing, We remain steadfast in our commitment to working with the Security Council and all Member States to ensure that future UN peacekeeping operations are more adaptable, effective, and responsive instruments for maintaining international peace and security. Our goal must be to ensure that when UN mission departs, they leave behind not dependency, but a legacy of resilience, opportunity, and self-sustained peace. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Somalia for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Senegal.

Mr. President, let me take this opportunity to commend Ambassador Alfou de Elba of Panama for the excellent stewardship of the Council during the month of August. And also take this opportunity to congratulate you, Mr. President, and the Republic of Korea for assuming the presidency of the Council for this month. I would also like to assure you of Seychelles' fullest support and cooperation during your tenure as President of the Council for this month. Mr. President, I would also like to thank the Republic of Korea, in collaboration with Denmark and Pakistan, for convening this timely open debate. I also want to thank the briefers, the Under-Secretary-General for Peace Operations, Ambassador LaCroix, the Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, Madame Rosemary DiCarlo, the Chair of the Peacebuilding Commission, Ambassador Tomasz Zanessin, and Dr. Gennaro Sot of the International Peace Institute for their valuable insights. Mr. President, as conflicts and crises increase in number, spread across regions, and deepen their humanitarian and socio-economic consequences, UN peace operations remain indispensable for the maintenance of international peace and security. With more than 120 operations deployed in over 50 countries, they have helped manage ceasefires, reduce the length and intensity of conflicts, protect civilians, and reinforce adherence to international humanitarian and human rights laws. For Sierra Leone, this is not an abstraction. Our own journey from conflict to peace and democracy stands as living testimony to the transformative impact of UN peace operations. Yet, over the past decade, these operations have faced mounting challenges including increasingly complex conflict environments, geopolitical divisions within this Council, persistent funding shortfalls, and at times, challenges with host governments. These realities demand that the review mandated by the Pact of the Future deliver a more agile, adaptable, and sustainable UN peace architecture. Mr. President, Allow me to highlight four priorities from Sierra Leone's perspective regarding the future of peace operations. First, peace operations must remain fundamentally political tools in the service of durable peace. Mandates should be clear, sequenced, and aligned with broader political strategies as envisaged in Action 2022 of the Pact for the Future. For the Security Council must craft outcome-oriented mandates that place political engagement, mediation, and reconciliation at the center. This requires meaningful consultation among the Council, the Secretariat, field missions, and host states, ensuring that mandates foster local ownership and reconciliation. Establishing timelines for DDR, security guarantees, prisoner exchanges, and other core elements of ceasefire can help sustain fragile political processes. Periodic mandate reviews, as encouraged by resolution 2594 of 2021 will allow for more efficient use of resources and smoother transition from peacekeeping to peacebuilding. Second, sustainable financing and partnerships are indispensable. Liquidity crisis must never compromise the safety of peacekeepers, civilians, or mandate delivery. Sierra Leone underscores the importance of predictable, and adequate financing, including through the full implementation of Resolution 2719 on financing AU-led peace support operations. Africa-led initiatives such as the AU and its Regional Economic Communities' Standby Forces remain vital for addressing cross-border extremist threats. Strengthening such cooperation will ensure more coherent responses to complex regional challenges. Over the years, African-led operations have proven their ability to grasp local dynamics, anticipate conflict triggers, and advance durable strategies. The AU has established a standby force designed for rapid response, created a mediation platform to facilitate peace talks, and operationalized a peace fund that has supported initiatives across conflict zones. This reflects Africa's commitment to leveraging regional expertise and resources to confront complex security challenges. Yet, more consistent support for Africa-led operations, particularly through the implementation of Resolution 2719, is urgently required. Third, missions must adapt through innovation, training, and inclusivity. Peacekeepers require the right skill and tools to succeed in today's environment. These include specialized training on conflict resolution, protection of civilians, cultural sensitivity, and the women, peace, and security, and climate. Peace and security nexuses, greater investment is needed in standby forces, non-discriminatory recruitment, and mission-specific preparation. At the same time, technology and data should be harnessed for early warning, situational awareness, and integrated responses. Sierra Leone supports the wider deployment of the UNITE Aware platform to enhance operational coordination. We must also prioritize the protection and inclusion of women, youth, and children. Conflicts disproportionately affect them, yet their participation improves peace outcomes. We therefore call for robust application of the Secretary-General's Bulletin on the PSEA stronger accountability mechanism and meaningful inclusion of women and youth in peace processes, transitional justice and peacebuilding. Fourth, accountability and legitimacy are central to credibility. Peace operations must be conducted with transparency and accountability for violations of international, humanitarian, and human rights laws, whether by peacekeepers or other actors. Strengthening triangular cooperation between the UN, troops and police contributing countries, host states, and other stakeholders will improve implementation of Resolution 2589 and ensure accountability for crimes against peacekeepers. Building host state capacity to deliver justice is equally essential. Mr. President, Sierra Leone strongly supports the Action for Peacekeeping Initiative and its successor, the A4P+. These frameworks remain vital for setting realistic expectations, strengthening partnerships, and ensuring safer and more effective missions. They must be fully integrated into the current review and aligned with the priorities of the UN80 Initiative to ensure peace operations remain fit for purpose. In addressing political resistance and mistrust, we must remind ourselves that peace operations succeed only when grounded in trust, transparency, and genuine partnership with the people they serve. They are not a substitute for political will, but they remain among the UN's most powerful instruments for advancing peace. In closing, Mr. President, CERLUN reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the principles of the UN Charter and to working with all partners to ensure UN peace operations become agile, more inclusive, and more effective in addressing present and future challenges. We look forward to the outcome of the review and the action-oriented recommendation that ensure UN peace operations continue to serve as a beacon of hope for millions across the world. I thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the representative of Sierra Leone for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Russian Federation.

First of all.

Mr. President, please allow me to congratulate you on assuming the presidency of the Security Council in the month of September, and I would like to thank Panama for their presidency in August. Mr. President, we thank the delegation of the Republic of Korea for organizing a very timely discussion on the future of peace operations in the light of the ongoing secretariat's work on the review. We are grateful to Undersecretaries-General Jean-Pierre Lacroix and Undersecretary-General Rosemary DeCarlo, as well as to the Chair of the UN Peacebuilding Commission, Thomas Sontheim, and the representative of the International Peace Institute, General Russo, we thank them for their substantive statements. UN peace operations, especially peacekeeping missions, have always been a hallmark of the United Nations. The blue helmets are a direct embodiment of the international community's collective will to assist those who are in urgent need. We honor the memory of peacekeepers and other UN personnel, including Russian citizens, who died fulfilling their noble duty. Mr. President, both peacekeepers and special political missions are vital tools for addressing conflicts and crises that threaten international peace and security. However, at the same time, they differ significantly in their mandates, objectives, resources, and the funding methods. At the same time, recently, both types have faced similar challenges, including what is called the host state's consent crisis. We believe that this stems largely from a loss of clarity about what is the core purpose and core mandate of such missions and of a realistic assessment of what is achievable. We have seen that some missions have become vehicles for promoting ideological agendas widely spread at the UN headquarters, but which at the same time often do not align at all with the values or urgent needs of the host countries. And this understandably leads to distrust and questions from governments and populations as to why they need such a presence. The trust crisis is now acknowledged and peace operations are under review, but we still see that such terms as a core mandate and clear achievable tasks are interpreted by member states and the secretariat sometimes in the opposite way. Despite the understanding that mandates should be tailored to each conflict and local context, the resolutions continue to be filled with the same identical liberal agenda. If a certain wording was agreed upon for the Central African Republic, why not use it in a resolution on Cyprus, for example? We, in our turn, firmly believe that the focus of missions created by the Security Council should be facilitating in a political settlement. In peacekeeping operations, this means creating the kinds of security conditions that the host state or conflicted parties are, for one or another reason, are unable to provide. The guiding principle must be the UN Charter in its entirety, the sovereignty of the host state, and the basic principles of peacekeeping. Both UN field presence and the Secretariat staff in their work must strictly adhere to Articles 100 and 101 of the Charter. We also note that many UN representatives and UN-affiliated experts are disseminating the statement that mission problems stem from the so-called geopolitical rifts or disagreements within the Security Council members. We believe that this is true only when it regards a very few, limited number of contentious issues. In most cases, Council members agree on the nature of the problem and the UN's ability to respond. Disagreements arise more often when missions are overloaded with tasks which are not directly related to the Security Council, such as, for example, over involvement in domestic issues and domestic governance, human rights, climate change and development and such like. Indeed, over the past decades, compact missions have been replaced by massive, multi-thousand operations which include long lists of tasks, so much so that it's often unclear where peacekeepers' responsibilities end and the state's begins. And as a result, in some countries, blue helmets have been present for more than a decade, and their withdrawal becomes a problem in itself and is now being discussed under the discussion on transition. And amid the UN's current financial crisis, overloaded mandates and insufficient resources for core tasks make the situation worse. Under such conditions, we must not in word, but indeed revive and implement in practice the traditional UN division of labor, where missions focus on their core task and the funds and programs focus on theirs. This brings us to peacebuilding, especially in light of the ongoing review of peacebuilding architecture. In the the course of this area of existence, Member States have not been able to define its scope. And the concept here shifts between becoming sustaining peace, preventive diplomacy, and we have also seen attempts to even couple it with counterterrorism. There are ongoing debates about whether peacebuilding must be part of peacekeeping and special political missions. We would like to note in this regard that peacebuilding fund projects are implemented through country teams, not through missions. And this is more than logical, especially given that the funds limited resources and are meant for targeted use to be later picked up by long-term development programs which have a longer term. Assigning missions mandates that we know will take years to fulfill film, determines them for prolonged presence in the countries and integration to the host countries' politics and the economy. Mr. President, in conclusion, we would like to say that today's challenges and peace operations require, first and foremost, political will from member states and the Secretariat in order to address them substantively and take measures which are suited to the current geopolitical context. In our view, the issue here is not a lack of theoretical knowledge or innovative ideas when it comes to peacekeeping. Experience has shown that when Security Council members who bear the main responsibility for maintaining international peace and security reach a consensus, then the Secretariat has always enough expertise and experience to prepare suitable technical proposals that reflect regional and national contexts and the position of the key stakeholders. And this does not require transforming established mandate structures or peacekeeping or replacing them with some kind of modules. We also hope that under the UN80 initiative, the Secretary-General will propose solutions centered on a rational and balanced vision for the future of peace and security operations cluster, rather than just a mechanical staff cuts. We stress the need to uphold the Charter principle of equitable geographic representation and avoid reducing the effectiveness in implementing the mandates which have already been issued by member states. Any new ideas for transforming peace operations must be discussed by member states in the specialized committees, fourth and fifth committee of the General Assembly, and the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations, closed formats with opaque participant selection are for us just interest-based forums, and such forums cannot make specific and mandatory decisions. I thank you.

I thank the representative of the Russian Federation for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of the United Kingdom.

Thank you, President. First, let me thank the delegation of Panama for their excellent stewardship of the Council for the month of August. And I also congratulate you on the assumption of the presidency of the Republic of Korea for this month. We wish you the best and you have our full support. Second, I thank USG's Lacroix and Di Carlo, PBC Chair Zanuso, and Ms. Russo for briefing us today. Colleagues, for over three quarters of a century, UN peace operations have played a critical role supporting international peace and security. However, as our briefers have set out, the nature of conflict is evolving and so must our approach to addressing them. So I will make three points. First, the effectiveness of UN peace operations depend on their having realistic mandates which are grounded in a clear political strategy, without which missions will struggle to deliver and risk losing support from host communities. UN peace operations should also focus on the areas where they have comparative advantage, enabling other parts of the UN system or other actors to lead activities where they are better placed. Second, it is important to ensure UN peace operations are tailored to the context in which they operate. Some contexts, such as the Central African Republic, may suit larger, multidimensional peacekeeping operations. But in many situations, smaller, scalable and targeted peace operations may be more appropriate. For example, the UN verification mission in Colombia, which has played an important role supporting implementation of the peace agreement. Peace operations also need to adapt as situations change, including through the use of good contingency plans. Third, We should continue pressing for improvements in the performance of peace operations, for example, by providing appropriate training and equipment, but also by ensuring performance and conduct standards are upheld, including through a zero tolerance approach to sexual exploitation and abuse. We also encourage continued work to advance women's participation in peacekeeping, as supported by the ELSI initiative, which the UK is proud to co-chair. President, UN peace operations are a critical and unique tool for advancing international peace and security. That is why the Security Council and other Member States must continue giving peace operations the support they need, whether through condemning attacks on peacekeepers or ensuring assessed contributions are paid in full, on time and without conditions. As USG de Carlo said, it comes down to political will from host countries, regional actors, and this Council. The Secretary-General's review on the future of all forms of UN peace operations, alongside the UN80 reform agenda, offer a real opportunity to ensure UN peace operations remain effective in the coming decades. The United Kingdom stands ready to work with others to further strengthen this indispensable tool for peace. And I thank you.

Thank you, representative of United Kingdom for the statement. I shall now make a statement in my capacity as the representative of the Republic of Korea. I also thank USG LaCroix, USG DiCarlo, and Ambassador Schacht-Nisen for their informative and comprehensive briefings. I also thank Ms. Russo for sharing her inspiring insights. As reaffirmed in the meetings hosted by the Trio Initiative of Denmark and Pakistan and my own country, the Republic of Korea, UN peace operations enjoy broad support from UN member states as a unique instrument of effective multilateral burden sharing for maintaining international peace and security. Building on that support, the strength of peace operations must be preserved while enabling them to adapt to the current liquidity challenges. Our efforts to drive changes should be redoubled in that spirit. In this regard, we would like to emphasize the following four approaches. First, the Security Council should translate the consensus on tailored and agile missions into concrete practice. However, the action-oriented recommendations for how to put this rhetorical consensus into concrete practice should be included in the Secretary-General's peace operation review. Regular assessment should accompany mandate renewals and allow adjustments as conditions evolve on the ground. However, when amending the mandates, Consideration should also be given to their interconnected nature in achieving sustained peace, including the protection of civilians, human rights, monitoring, and WPS. As the chair of the Security Council Working Group on Peacekeeping Operations, we will continue to the Security Council's discussions on this matter. Second, the strategy for UN peace operations should be designed under a holistic approach that considers the peace continuum. In addition, as we underlined in their media statement this morning, peace operations need to be climate sensitive throughout the peace continuum. This approach helps sustain hard-won gains by the presence of peace operations and address root causes of conflict by maintaining an approach maintaining appropriate presence and support. To that end, Korea has advocated that the Security Council strengthen cooperation with Peacebuilding Commission, PBC, to reinforce synergies between peace operations and peacebuilding. As stated by the PBC Chair in the briefing, in cases like Liberia, the PBC has played a convening role in developing the peacebuilding plan after the withdrawal of peacekeeping mission. This coordinated approach between the two UN toolboxes can ensure that transitions from mission settings to long-term UN engagement are sustainable. As the informal coordinator between the two bodies, Korea has explored practical measures to strengthen such complementarity and is committed to continuing these efforts. Third, strengthening technological capabilities in peace operations should be pursued more actively to enhance efficiency and cost-effectiveness in mandate implementation. The financial constraints currently facing UN peace operations heighten the need to strengthen their technological capabilities. In addition, UN peace operations have faced growing challenges on safety and security of its personnel. Therefore, to strengthen mission effectiveness and promote the safety and security of mission personnel, UN peace operations should more actively cooperate with host countries to utilize technologies such as AI, unmanned aerial systems, and telemedicine. It also should support the efforts of troop-contributing countries to introduce such technologies. For our part, The Republic of Korea is actively engaged in efforts to harness technology. This includes providing ASEAN TCCs with training under the Triangular Partnership Program, as well as implementing a smart camp project for the Korean unit in UNMISS to ensure resources are used effectively for base management. Last but not least, peace operations must take a people-centered approach implementing their mandates. Local populations are not just beneficiary of peace operations efforts, but active participants in implementing the peace process with their national ownership. Building trust with host nations and local populations is essential for a mission success and for a lasting and positive legacy. Korea, for its part, has been committed to promoting local community engagement in this regard. For example, the Korean peacekeepers in UNMISS have been actively supporting grassroots initiatives like rice cultivation and providing vocational training to improve community resilience. Colleagues, as a major financier and troop contributor, the Republic of Korea is committed to helping peace operations adapt to current and future challenges. We hope today's open debate will inform the SG's Peace Operations Review and the PVAR, and provide guidance to the ongoing peacekeeping reform efforts under A4P and A4P+. I thank you. I resume my functions as President of the Council. I wish to remind all speakers to limit their statement to more than three minutes in order to enable the Council to carry out its work expeditiously. The flashing light on the microphone will prompt the speakers to bring their remarks to a close after three minutes. I now give the floor to the representative of Kazakhstan.

We highly- oh.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. President. Allow me to commend the Presidency of the Republic of Korea for convening today's open debate. We also highly value the statements of the briefers for the comprehensive reports and insightful views on the way forward. Kazakhstan welcomes the comprehensive review mandated by the Pact for the Future and commends the Secretariat for its inclusive and transparent approach to the consultation process. In today's complex global environment, international peace and security face unprecedented challenges. We share the view that the United Nations requires more flexible, adaptive, and politically supported response tools, particularly in the face of non-state armed actors, transnational threats, digital risks, and the erosion of trust in traditional peacekeeping models. Kazakhstan has consistently advocated for rethinking of mandate design and resource allocation in U.S. peace operations. We support the need for predictable, adequate, and sustainable financing, including the development of more flexible mechanisms for allocating resources based on evolving needs. We also believe that mandates must be politically realistic, context-specific, mobile and compact, technologically equipped, and developed in consultation with host countries and affected populations. In light of emerging challenges, such as digital disinformation and the activities of non-state actors, Kazakhstan supports the development of a doctrine on information integrity within the mandates of peace operations. We believe it is crucial to enhance the capacity of missions to monitor and counter hostile narratives, particularly in conflict zones. Kazakhstan supports the following priorities: strengthening coordination between the political and peacekeeping components of missions; exploring the introduction of flexible transitional models of mandates adapted to changing conditions on the ground; supporting regional and national peacekeeping training centers; expanding the practice of seconding officers from developing countries to the UN Secretariat. There is an urgent need to strengthen the safety and security of peacekeepers, as well as to ensure strict adherence to international obligations by all parties. In this regard, Kazakhstan strongly condemns the attack against UNIFIL peacekeepers on 3 September this year and calls for the prevention of such incidents in the future. As a responsible member of the United Nations, Kazakhstan continues to pay the assessed contributions to the UN peacekeeping budget in full and on time. We therefore call to support the peacekeeping activities of the Organization in this challenging period. Mr. Chair, we firmly believe that political will and partnership will ensure that UN peace operations remain effective and relevant in meeting.

The challenges of the 21st century.

I thank you.

I thank the representative of Kazakhstan for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Indonesia.

Thank you, Mr. President, for convening this open debate. And I also thank USG Lacroix, USG DiCarlo, Ms. Giannaruso, and Chair of the PBC for their valuable insights. Our meeting today is truly permanent, as the UN peacekeeping is at a very critical juncture with many fundamental questions regarding its future role and modalities. But let's start with acknowledging that peacekeeping operations have always been a symbol of multilateralism at its best. The blue helmets embody the credibility and legitimacy of the UN, along with a sense of hope and comfort for those in conflict and post-conflict situations that the world is on their side. In facing ever-growing global challenges, rising asymmetrical conflicts and geopolitical rivalries, we must ensure that peacekeeping operations remain an effective and reliable tool for international peace and stability instead of becoming subject to power politics. Indonesia therefore believes that moving away from UN peacekeeping is not the solution. Instead, we must ensure that peacekeeping operations become more agile, more adaptive, more future-ready, and more fit for purpose. Against this backdrop, allow me to underline three key points. First, mandates must focus on what really matters. For missions to succeed, mandates must be clear, rooted in realities on the ground, and focus on actual needs rather than overburden with auxiliary tasks. Realistic mandates which are free from rhetoric will allow for effective implementation. Consulting more closely with host nations as well as with troops and police contributing countries is key, along with close engagement with relevant actors on the ground. Ensuring that local perspectives are heard is essential to nurture a sense of mutual ownership towards sustaining peace. This will also contribute to inform decision making that shield peacekeeping operations from narrow political interests, ultimately serving our common purpose. Second, to invest in the safety and security of both civilians and peacekeepers. Optimizing the use of technology will improve situational awareness and increase operational effectiveness of the peacekeeping operation, and this will strengthen the safety of both civilians and peacekeepers in complex environments. And third, to ensure sustainability of resources. Without adequate resources, even the best crafted mandates will remain merely aspirational. We need to continue efforts to expand financing base for UN peacekeeping, including through stronger partnerships with regional organizations, international financial institutions, and civil society. Sustained support to peacekeeping operations will also prevent the relapse of conflicts while paving ways to peacebuilding efforts. Mr. President, the review of peace operations next year, as requested by the Pact for the Future, will be our opportunity to shape the future of peacekeeping operations. Peacekeeping operations must evolve with purpose. It must adapt to new realities while drawing strength from past achievements. Nevertheless, one thing for sure, UN peacekeeping must remain an indispensable tool for global peace and security. And rest assured of Indonesia's commitment to this shared endeavor. Thank you.

I thank the representative of Indonesia for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Philippines.

Mr. President, the Philippines aligns itself with a collective vision, collective vision for the future of United Nations peace operations, and believes that these operations must be adapted to face the growing challenges and that countries must come together to respond to them. As our president said at the UN General Assembly three years ago, we must transcend our differences and committing to ending war, upholding justice, respecting human rights, and maintaining international peace and security. He also emphasized that at the same time, the United Nations must forge ahead with its flagship tradition of global peacekeeping. Mr. President, UN peace operations must be guided by agility, realism, and strong partnerships. To remain fit for purpose, peacekeeping must adapt to evolving challenges such as disinformation, cyber threats, and asymmetric tactics. The Philippines strongly supports the implementation of the future of peacekeeping study conducted in close coordination with host countries, regional organizations, and local communities to ensure that the proposed models are both legitimate and effective. The Philippines believes that mandate should remain realistic and achievable, developed in close consultation with host and troop and police contributing countries and regional groups, while advancing long-term peacebuilding objectives. As an experienced and committed peacemaker, the Philippines recognizes that protection of civilians, gender mainstreaming, and human rights remain integral in UN peace operations. Women's meaningful participation and cultural awareness foster trust and enhance effectiveness, as demonstrated by the Philippines' own success in establishing the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao in the southern Philippines. Mr. President, core UN peace operations capacities must be preserved and strengthened with priorities on prevention, political processes, and rapid deployment. At the Secretariat, field experience must be valued in decision-making posts, and planning and analysis must be reinforced to respond quickly to new crises. Member States must meet their financial obligations promptly and to ensure financial predictability for UN operations. Partnerships with regional organizations and financial institutions can bring added value, but this must be based on transparency, accountability, and respect for UN principles. We recognize that lasting peace requires political solutions. UN operations must reinforce national ownership by supporting locally driven dialogue reconciliation and inclusive processes rather than imposing externally driven systems. Regional organizations must also be engaged as partners in mediation and preventive diplomacy, and the Secretary-General's good offices must be adequately supported to intervene early and constructively. As a reliable partner, committed peacemaker and innovative Pathfinder, we reiterate our readiness to increase our engagement and support in peace operations with more Filipinos, including skilled women peacekeepers on the ground. The Philippines will continue working with all stakeholders to ensure that UN peace operations remain credible, effective, and responsive to today's and tomorrow's challenges. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank the representative of the Philippines for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Austria.

Mr. President, Excellencies, first, I would like to thank the Republic of Korea for organizing this open debate on the Secretary-General's review on the future of peace operations and reiterate our full support to your trio initiative together with Pakistan and Denmark. Austria remains a staunch supporter of UN peace operations as a vital tool for the maintenance of international peace and security. 140,000 Austrians have served in multilateral missions around the world, from Central Africa to Lebanon and the Western Balkans. Peace operations are not a thing of the past. They remain an irreplaceable expression of multilateral engagement in prevention, stabilization and peacebuilding. While fully committing to UN peace operations, a renewed focus on political solutions, prevention and mediation must guide our future engagement. In this regard, we welcome that the Council was able to agree on another 16-month renewal of UNIFIL, one of the missions where Austria is a long-standing troop contributor, ensuring the successful logistics of the mission. Let me share a few thoughts regarding the review of peace operations. First, UN missions must become more flexible and agile. For Austria, adaptability in mandate design is not an option, but a necessity. Missions must be able to evolve alongside political realities, ensure effective transitions between mission types, and sustain engagement beyond drawdowns. Above all, every mission must be anchored in a clearly defined and politically achievable end state. Second, mission planning must become a central focus. The DPO, DPPA, DOS guidelines, mission concepts, and mission plans are a welcome step forward, but we encourage the build-up of designated planning capacities and focal points at the headquarters and at mission level, as well as the systematic involvement of member states in reviewing new planning instruments. On this note, Austria was honored to host the Office of Military Affairs Leadership Retreat in Vienna this summer with a strong focus on mission planning. Third, the protection of civilians must remain a central pillar of all UN peace operations. This requires contingency planning for situations where civilians are at imminent risk, as well as the development of comprehensive guidance on protection across the full spectrum of missions. Importantly, where UN operations work in parallel with regional or coalition-led missions, mandates to protect civilians must be explicit, rooted in international law, and supported by accountability mechanisms. Fourth, partnerships will be essential for the future of peace operations. Austria attaches great importance to strengthening cooperation between the UN and regional organizations, in particular the African Union. We encourage the review to explore joint planning frameworks, common standards on protection and human rights, as well as predictable financing, including through assessed contributions in line with UNSC Resolution 2719. And lastly, we must adopt a one UN approach. We need stronger synergies and system-wide coherence between peacekeeping, special political missions, long-term development efforts, and UN country teams, while fully making use of the PBC and PBF. The review should thus take into account broader reform processes, such as the UN Aid Initiative, while preserving its own focus. Mr. President, you can count on Austria's full support for this review. Austria will continue to do its part with humility, responsibility and a deep commitment to multilateralism. And if entrusted with an elected seat on the Security Council for the term 2027-28, we will carry this commitment with us. I thank you, Mr. President.

I thank the representative of Austria for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Switzerland.

Thank you, Mr. President. I thank you for convening. this debate, and we commend the Republic of Korea, Denmark, and Pakistan for their efforts this year in support of peacekeeping. We also thank the Under Secretary-General Zoula Kwa, and Under Secretary-General DeCarlo, Ambassador Tsahyn, and Ms. Russo for their insightful statements. For eight decades now, United Nations peace operations have contributed to shortening the duration of conflicts, to supporting political solutions, and protecting millions of civilians. In a context which is characterized by geopolitical fragmentation, the growing complexity of armed violence, climate-related insecurity, and the threat posed by non-state armed groups and violations of international humanitarian law, including repeated attacks against UN and humanitarian personnel, their value remains uncontestable. But they must adapt, and that is why we fully support the review on the future of all forms of peace operations. Please allow me to to highlight three priority areas. First, peace operations must become more flexible and better adapted. Mandates must be realistic, grounded in the needs on the ground, and oriented towards achievable results, while giving missions the necessary flexibility to prioritize their tasks. They must remain anchored in strong and inclusive political strategies that uphold the primacy of politics and involve local actors, including civil society. The comparative advantages of different types of missions, agencies, and institutions, such as a peacebuilding commission, must be harnessed. This requires innovation and thinking beyond the established approaches. The review of the peacebuilding architecture provides an opportunity to make the necessary structural adjustments. Second, peace operations must have a timely access to predictable financial and human resources, allowing for planning based on intended results and not only on the budget cycle. They must also have the means and the possibility to use appropriate technologies for the effective implementation of their mandate. Strengthened cooperation with Member States, regional organizations and UN agencies would foster better burden sharing and more efficient use of resources. Planning must cover the entire cycle of work, including the post-operational phase. And finally, the protection of civilians enshrined in international humanitarian law and human rights law remains the non-negotiable core of any peace operation. Lasting peace cannot be envisaged without a safe and secure environment for civilians based on respect for human rights and the implementation of the women, peace and security agenda. Partnerships with regional organizations, international financial institutions and civil society are also essential to strengthen the effectiveness, legitimacy, and sustainability of peace operations. Mr. President, the challenges ahead for peace operations are considerable, both for Member States and for the United Nations. We will be able to meet them if we move forward together, united by the same objective: building lasting peace. I thank you.

I thank the representative of Switzerland for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Colombia.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. Allow me to thank the Deputy Secretaries-General, the Chair of the PBC and Madame Rousseau for their valuable contributions. Speaking about the future of United Nations peace operations means reflecting on our capacity to mobilize in response to threats to peace and in support of peace processes. Colombia has advanced with determination on the path toward peace. We recognize the increasing complexities of conflicts, the challenges for states, and the vulnerability of civilian populations in these contexts, especially women and children, girls and boys. My country's decision to turn to the Security Council to verify the implementation of the peace agreement is a reflection of the trust that we have in the organization and its abilities in vital areas such as building trust and providing political assistance. The special political mission in Colombia has been a key component in the implementation of what was agreed, and its success is also the success of this Council, a reflection of what is possible when multilateral will is mobilized in support of peace efforts. Mr. President, Colombia would like to highlight three aspects that favor the functioning of peace missions based on our experience. Firstly, the centrality of national ownership and leadership and the value of having precise, focused mandates developed in close coordination with national authorities. Second, the ability to carry out the mandate in areas where it is most needed. For this, it is crucial to develop operational capacities in critical or remote zones and to generate reports that have a breakdown by territory. And thirdly, we recognize that peace is only sustainable when the local population is effectively included through a participatory approach. the full integration of a gender and intersectional perspective, and a comprehensive understanding of the structural causes of violence. In this context, stronger communication channels with the UN development system present in the country are crucial. Mr. President, the protection of civilians, the agendas of women and youth, peace and security and a human rights approach are crucial in contexts of greater conflict intensity, as well as being fundamental elements for the sustainability of any peace agreement. In my country's opinion, they hold a central place in the future of peace operations. Excellencies, Colombia, as a future non-permanent member of the Security Council, and based on our own experience, is ready to contribute to ensure that UN peace operations uphold the principles that 80 years ago gave rise to the formation of this organization. Thank you very much.

I thank the representative of Colombia for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Turkey.

Thank you, Mr. President. I also thank the briefers for their insightful remarks. We are facing the highest number of conflicts since the foundation of this organization. Human cost of crisis is staggering, with millions of people displaced, lives shattered, and communities torn apart. Hence, peace operations remain more essential and relevant than ever. Peace operations are among the most visible and effective expressions of multilateralism. They provide a cost-efficient means of conflict management and a vital tool to protect civilians, prevent regional spillovers, and help sustainable peace. Despite their some shortcomings, they remain one of the strongest collective security instruments at our disposal. Leadership of the UN in this regard is irreplaceable. Our common objective must be to adapt peace operations to a rapidly evolving global landscape. Today's missions face complex transnational challenges, terrorism, organized crime, cyber and technological threats. The Pact for the Future reflects Member States' commitment to shaping peace operations that are better fit for purpose. To remain fit for purpose, operations must be guided by realistic, sequenced mandates with clear transition and exit strategies. moving away from rigid, one-size-fits-all models. At the same time, sustainable peace cannot be achieved solely through external support. Stronger partnerships with regional and sub-regional organizations, closer cooperation with communities and host governments, and systematic engagement with the Peacebuilding Commission are all essential for legitimacy and long-term success. In this regard, The 2025 Peacebuilding Architecture Review is a timely opportunity. We would like to see deeper engagement and complementarity between the Peacebuilding Commission and the Security Council and ECOSOC. Financing also remains critical. Predictable, sufficient and sustained funding, together with robust accountability and clear benchmarks, will enhance credibility and effectiveness of the missions. While the practice of UN peacekeeping has evolved significantly over the years, three fundamental principles remain central to its success: consent of the parties, impartiality, and the non-use of force except in self-defense and defense of the mandate.

It is clearly stated.

In Brahimi report that consent of the local parties and impartiality should remain the bedrock principles of peacekeeping. As specified in the UN peacekeeping operation principles and guidelines, in the absence of such a consent, a UN peacekeeping operation risks becoming a party to the conflict and being drawn away from its inherent role of keeping the peace.

In this context, we would like to underline that the need for the UN to seek the consent of the.

Turkish Cypriot side regarding the activities of UNFICYP.

And to remain impartial.

Given the long history and some controversial record of the UNFICIP, this will be a positive, progressive step. Mr. President, peace operations can only succeed when accompanied by political solutions. They are not a substitute for political will, but a support mechanism to create space for dialogue and reconciliation. As a core UN function, they remain indispensable. Turkey reaffirms its commitment to the UN peace operations and their review with a view to ensuring effective implementation.

Thank you. I thank the representative of Turkey for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of Guatemala.

Thank you, Mr. President. We join in thanking Monsieur Lacroix, Madame Di Carlo, Mr. Tsaneisen, and Ms. Rousseau for their important contributions and efforts, as well as the Republic of Korea for organizing this debate. We agree on the need to deepen discussions on the future of peace operations. in a context of more complex conflicts, limited resources, and the troubling lack of unity in this Council in support of peace operations, and the uncertainty about the future of some missions with key mandates. In this scenario, we consider it essential that the Council strengthen its commitment to comprehensive political solutions that address the root causes of conflicts prioritizing mediation and dialogue with a view to building sustainable and inclusive peace. Likewise, any process of reduction or withdrawal of forces must be carefully planned, incorporating concrete measures to avoid gaps in the protection of civilians and ensuring an effective response to ongoing threats. These processes cannot be arbitrary. The perspectives of host countries and troop contributors are indispensable. Mr. President, Guatemala has been a direct witness to the positive impact of peace operations. For this reason, we firmly believe that linking the human rights and peacekeeping agendas can transform paradigms. We see it as crucial to strengthen preventive and peacebuilding approaches, taking advantage of the role of the Peacebuilding Commission and the synergies with UN agencies, financial institutions and regional organizations. It is fundamental to make full and coordinated use of the capacities of the United Nations system as a whole in host countries. In this context, we highlight the importance of ensuring the meaningful participation of women and youth in all phases of peace processes. Based on our experience with MINUGUA, we recognize that legitimate political commitment, inter-institutional collaboration, the availability of adequate resources, and access to truthful information, international support, and above all, local ownership through the active participation of civil society, are all decisive factors for peace operations. We hope that the review that is to be carried out by the Secretary-General reflects these lessons learned. Guatemala will continue to be an ally in collective efforts to strengthen peace operations in order to have more effective peace missions and thus achieve successful transition processes. Thank you very much.

I thank the representative of Guatemala for the statement. I now give the floor to the representative of LAFIE.

Thank you. Mr. President, I thank the Republic of Korea for its leadership and convening this important debate that follows meetings on peace operations held by Denmark and Pakistan. I also thank the briefers, USG LaCroix, USG DeCarlo, Ambassador Zaneisen, and Ms. Russo for their insightful contributions. Mr. President, UN peace operations remain an essential instrument for maintaining international peace and security. They have a proven track record contributing to stability in regions across the world. However, we are witnessing a growing crisis of confidence in these operations, stemming from a lack of political support and financial constraints. The review on the future of UN peace operations offers an opportunity to address this crisis and chart a path forward. As an incoming member of the Security Council, Latvia is committed to prioritizing UN deployments. Mr. President, while peace operations are complex endeavors whose success depends on a myriad of factors, today I will focus on three elements: embedding peace operations within the overall UN peace continuum, rethinking the approach to their mandates, and equipping them with up-to-date tools. First, peace operations should serve as means to achieve political results. They must be closely aligned with other UN lines of action, including mediation, peacebuilding, and development assistance. Furthermore, they should remain adaptable as situations evolve. From the outset, clear benchmarks should be established to enable timely rightsizing and transition of peace operations in line with the conditions on the ground. Second, we need to revisit the approach to mandates of peace operations. The Council should reassert its role providing strategic guidance for crafting realistic mandates that advance political objectives and foster unity of purpose among the host nation, TCCs. PCCs, and local communities. The mandates need to be clear and tailored to the specific context, reflecting the comparative advantage of peace operations over other tools. While focusing on the core tasks, we must remember that the legitimacy of peace operations depends on their ability to address the needs on the ground, including through protection of civilians and upholding of human rights. Third, while mandates provide the blueprint, peace operations require the right tools to translate them into reality. To meet today's challenges, operations must harness modern technology as a force multiplier. Emerging tools such as artificial intelligence and unmanned systems can enhance situational awareness and operational efficiency. They can also help counter threats that themselves arise from technology, in particular the spread of disinformation targeting peacekeepers. Significant progress has been made, including the adoption of the strategy for the digital transformation on UN peacekeeping. It is now essential to assess the state of its implementation. Mr. President, UN peace operations are among the most cost-effective instruments in the arsenal of international community. The review of UN peace operations takes place as the UN as a whole undergoes transformations through the UN80 initiative. These two efforts should proceed in lockstep, reinforcing one another and contributing to a renewed commitment to the UN and to peace operations. I thank you.

I think the representative of Latvia for the statement. There are still a number of speakers remaining on my list for this meeting. I intend, with the concurrence of members of the Council, to suspend the meeting until 3 p.m. This meeting is suspended.