PBC Country Specific Meeting discusses draft of Burundi's Strategic Framework

11 June 2007

On 6 June 2007, the Peacebuilding Commission held an Informal Country Specific Meeting on Burundi regarding the proposed draft of the “Strategic Framework for Peacebuilding in Burundi.” Prepared in Bujumbura by both the Government of Burundi and its national and international partners, it proposes a strategic framework for peacebuilding in Burundi according to the principles of international cooperation.

Issues raised by Members of the Commission included:

1. Delegates wished to receive clarification concerning prioritizing issues and sequencing actions in order to review progress and to check if the agenda is on track. Suggestions included making the document more specific and action oriented. In doing so, the PBC should be sending the message that this is a “living document.” Many delegations concluded that the provisions should act as an interim document, allowing for later specifics to be addressed. Additionally, its adoption would signify that the process of peacebuilding will continue and that support of Burundi is crucial in order to keep this goal on track.
2. Some delegates wondered whether ratification of this document, or a similar one, at the Burundi level were to be accepted by the country, would it be available for changes that may arise in the future?
3. Some delegates wished to see civil society, regional parties, international parties and other notable resources briefed as to how they will be participating in the adoption and assignment of the proposal.
4. Concern was expressed that the document contained statements which need to be carefully studied in order to make the correct assessment of the UN’s role. For example, the text addresses refugees from Tanzania as being a threat to peace and such statements require careful consideration when revising.
5. It was reflected upon that some commitments made in the document are broader than the scope of the PBC and that defining a mechanism that can be agreed upon is crucial. It was also questioned how the Commission could incorporate lessons learned within the strategy. For example, the delegation had witnessed a presentation on children in armed conflict, but that in terms of the documents provision for security, there was no mentioning of child soldiers.
6. It was concluded that an interim, “living document” would be the best possible outcome in this circumstance. A delegation reminded the Commission that the document was a strategy, not an action plan, and suggested that the document could become more operational after revisions, including actions that can be taken immediately. They wish to see a document which is elaborate without committing to full-fledged action plan and to check whether priorities are right.

The Chairman noted that Burundi has strong expectations and hopes that actions will be taken soon, a view that all share and should keep in mind. By starting practical work early and discussing with the PBSO it is possible to have productive meetings at the working level as well as at the formal and informal.

Assistant Secretary-General Carolyn McAskie emphasized a high expectation in Burundi regarding the first report. Burundi wishes to be seen as the first success through the PBC’s “door.” Connections with the ground level, and keeping them assured of the mission of peacekeeping is pivotal for success in the country. The document must highlight key elements of priorities already identified, but at the same time, it should not be another action plan. The framework should be linked to tangible efforts so as to measure progress more efficiently and keep the goals on track. Actors at the ground level are anxious that the document not be turned into another layer but, reflect actions done and actions yet to come.

The PBC will meet again to discuss this document further and to present the recommendations on 27 June 2007.

-----------------------------------------

*This update is meant to be a summary of some of the main issues discussed during the meetings and does not represent a complete and official account of all positions expressed by Members of the Commission.

Prepared by Ashley Dittus