2005 Keynote Luncheon

Building Enduring Security: The Role of Post-Conflict Reconstruction

June 13, 2005 

Speech by Ms. Julia Taft, Former Assistant Administrator, United Nations Development Programme, during the 2005 WIIS Summer Symposium

I am delighted to be here. I last spoke to WIIS in 2002 and am impressed with the continuing expansion and relevance of the WIIS network and congratulate participants on the range of interest in which they are engaged. I ready your bios and your personal interests:

Cultural terrorism, extremism, intelligence; political economies of war; legitimacy of states and right to intervene by international community when human rights norms are violated; women in conflict; conflict resolution, roles of regional organizations, transnational satellite broadcasting and its implications for security, the laws of war.

Many of these issues were virtually untouched by practitioners and academics during the Cold War. Then, the security threats of weapons of mass destruction, biological warfare, interstate conflict and surrogate wars, counterintelligence – these were all hot topics then and when WIIS was first established.

In thinking through how I could most stimulate you to think of new careers, I realize you already get it!

You already understand the non-traditional threats to security. And you know that security no longer is confined to the military and intelligence worlds. It is as much about poverty, alienation of citizens from their governments, and poor governance as it is about weapons of mass destruction.

This morning I returned form my daughter’s graduation at Stanford. I am sure most graduation speakers throughout the US this commencement weekend commented on the fact that the Class of 05 began its college experience with the 9/11 tragedy which changed forever the nature of the world in which they live. It fundamentally changed, also the concepts of security – personal as well as nation state security.

I have been asked to briefly reflect today on the issue of security in post conflict situations. In doing so I hope to convey the challenges and possibly the emerging careers you might consider should you wish to pursue this field of study and action.

First, violent conflicts are not inevitable, even despite the presence of significant fault lines along class, race, economic and religious criteria within a society. It is the failure of political leadership and institutions in a society to address any disputes that may emerge from these differences that leads to violent conflict.

Once a conflict has erupted – and hopefully ended – redressing these inequities is essential. In a post conflict situation, of key concern is ensuring that popular grievances are dealt with and no longer fuel the flames of conflict.

The good news about post-conflict is that most in the society no longer want to fight. The bad news is the entire war-weary society has inflated expectations of immediate peace dividends. Impatient ex combatants expect respectable alternative livelihoods, refugees expect safe repatriation and resettlement (often to their home communities in which the issue of land ownership is vital); all citizens expect personal security, schooling for their children, health care, and economic opportunities. And the want these benefits all at once.

The critical time for external assistance is within the first 6 to 9 months, while hope for a peaceful future is not faded. And yet, this critical time period is also when spoilers seek revenge; corruption spirals as groups and individuals seek their own power; and when the nascent or failed state apparatus is unable to deliver any fruits of peace, and the international community is seldom in full coordinated strength on the ground.

In our experience at the UN particularly from my vantage point at the UN Development Programme, the most essential tasks must be in physical security. This is particularly true when there is no peace and no war; but also when a negotiated settlement is based upon sharing of power and influence. It is imperative that initial focus on rule of law (either international or national laws which need enforcement) be respected. This means a transitional period when justices and/or magistrates are empowered to provide transparent judicial procedures; when national police are trained, paid, and professionalized; and where corrections facilities are available to sequester those convicted of crimes.

All of these security issues are essential building blocks to encourage the society to trust in peace. The core challenge in the transitional governance arena is to jump start these institutions; while also capacitating the civil service to serve the other needs of society. Salaries (which have been suspended during war of are so low that the bureaucracy needs to resort to graft and corruption to survive economically) need to be paid. And important involvement of civil society in establishing a dialogue on national and community priorities, constitutional processes mist all be initiated soon after the conflict.

Fortunately the UN is responding more rapidly in deploying PKO and their presence is frequently an essential element in providing initial security for the population. Te external actors can provide an enabling environment, but no solution which is top down will be sustainable. Talented and culturally sensitive facilitators are essential to help bring the voice of the people into the reconciliation and reconstruction process. It is my observation that too many “boiler plate” external solutions dominate the early assistance phases, and lack cultural sensitivity which limit the national capacity to assume responsibility.

One of the consequences of heavy external aid, is that it is expensive, hires away from national institutions the most qualified people, paying higher salaries to implement external initiatives. To reduce the possibility of local resentment and local depletion of talent, every effort must be made to provide incentives for the local population to determine and implement their own priorities.

If this is not factored into every aspect of recovery, it will not be sustainable. Take for instance the security issues around disarmament and demobilization, and reintegration of combatants, PKO places top priority in seizing small arms and weapons of war. They in the past have encouraged cantonment of combatants, payment for weapons, and attractive incentives for combatants to become ex combatants. The DPKO-UNDP lessons learned on DDR found this approach often counter productive, because the reintegration aspects should be (but seldom are) designed before any demobilization – taking into consideration the importance of receiving communities not resenting the ex combatants, who were during the war often perpetrators of gross violations of human rights. Also the issue of proliferation of small arms, can only be addressed when the population at large feels it no longer needs personal weapons for protection.

So the issue of security (personal, governmental protection, and rule of law) are precursors of a post conflict reconstruction effort.

It is fitting today that we are at CSIS. CSIS and the Association of the US Army prepared a seminal study setting forth a conceptual framework for post conflict reconstruction. This study has been used by Carlos Pascal and the State Department, Congress, the UN, and many important institutions as a valuable tool in identifying the strategic interventions and sequencing of efforts required for successful reconstruction and recovery. Some of the authors are in this room, and I congratulate them on their extraordinary study. But of the critical pillars of tasks: Security; Justice and Reconciliation; Social and Economic Well Being; and Governance and Participation – it is very clear that the cross cutting governance tasks in justice and security sector reform are the most urgent.

Failed states have failed because of a breakdown in the compact between government and the people. So to restore the sense of personal security and trust, we all mist focus on helping the nascent authorities with these tasks. But we must do it in culturally appropriate ways, building conflict resolution into interventions, and involving civil society as a partner in promoting more responsive government

If this is not done, it is inevitable that lack economies will develop, labor (children and women in particular) will be exploited and/or trafficked, refugees will not return to help rebuild their homes, and the cycle of violence will repeat itself. In fact, Paul Collier (a former World Bank authority on post conflict) has said that 50 % of conflicts are renewed within five years. This is a failure rate which is unacceptable to all of us, and a challenge for anyone seeking to assist in helping societies rebuild themselves.

I encourage each of you to engage – assert yourselves and use your talents to empower the institutions and peoples in countries emerging from conflict. Remember, the countries may be broken – but the people are not. They need the resources and opportunities you can provide them to craft their own destiny. Thank you for your commitment and interest.

Women are not victims, they are important ingredients for solutions.