Briefing on the African Union Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development
Amani Africa
Date | 12 November, 2021
Tomorrow (12 November), African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) will convene its 1047th session on AU’s efforts on Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development (PCRD) in Africa.
Following the opening remarks of Permanent Representative of Egypt and PSC Chairperson of the month, Mohamed Omar Gad, the AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security (PAPS), Bankole Adeoye, is expected to make a statement. Representatives of selected Regional Economic Communities and Regional Mechanisms (RECs/RMs) as well as countries in political transition and post-conflict situations may also make statements.
This session is convened as part of the maiden PCRD awareness week on 7-13 November 2021, which is launched with the aim to increase awareness about AU projects, policies, mechanisms and achievements on post-conflict recovery and reconstruction efforts. The session also comes on the heels of other events of the awareness week such as the African Defence Attachés Forum to celebrate the first Annual African Flag Day and a virtual High-Level Seminar on PCRD in Africa to review the AU PCRD Policy framework and its implementation over the last 15 years.
As the session coincides with the 15th anniversary of the PCRD Policy Framework, it provides the Council a unique opportunity to take stock of progress in the implementation of the Policy since its adoption in 2006 and reflect on the challenges and implementation gaps.
Despite AU PCRD forms part of the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) and the African Governance Architecture (AGA), PSC’s 670th session noted that the PCRD aspect remains the ‘weakest link’ within the implementation of these frameworks. Since recently, there has been a deliberate effort by the Council in mainstreaming the PCRD in the context of its consideration of countries in political transition and post-conflict situations.
The PCRD Policy Framework was adopted in Banjul, The Gambia, in 2006 to serve as a guide for the development of comprehensive policies and strategies that seek to consolidate peace, promote sustainable development and prevent relapse of violence. The Policy Framework is anchored on six pillars upon which all PCRD efforts should be developed and sustained. These are: security; humanitarian/emergency assistance; political governance and transition; socio-economic reconstruction and development; human rights, justice and reconciliation; and women, gender and youth.
While the Policy Framework has proved to be an authoritative document in providing strategic guidance to address the needs of communities emerging from conflicts, there is a question of its adaptability to the new security dynamics in Africa as marked by the emergency of new threats notably climate change, environmental degradation and public health emergencies. This issue was particularly highlighted during the Council’s 1017th meeting where the Council requested the Chairperson of the Commission to review the policy framework in a manner that ‘it is adaptable to the contemporary dynamics in Member States in political transition and post-conflict situations’.
One of the issues likely to be highlighted in tomorrow’s session is progress made towards the operationalization of the policy framework over the last 15 years. In this respect, the establishment of an inter-departmental Task Force on PCRD in May 2016 is worth noting given its role as a platform for coordination and synergies in the work of the AU and the RECs/RMs in the implementation of the PCRD Policy. Though the Council agreed to establish PSC sub-committee on PCRD at its 230th session with the envisaged role of providing political leadership and oversight on the implementation of the Policy, this has not materialized as of yet. However, the establishment of the PCRD Centre, headquartered in Cairo, Egypt, pursuant to the decision of the Assembly (Decision Assembly/AU/Dec.351 (XVI)) is expected to be a breakthrough in the operationalization of the Policy Framework. It is to be recalled that the PAPS Department of the Commission held an assessment mission to Cairo in August this year with the objective of preparing for the official launch of the Centre as well as to enhance its operational tasks and capacities.
The briefing is also likely to provide a review of AU’s PCRD interventions and mechanisms deployed in support of countries that are in political transition and post-conflict situations. While political missions, peace support operations (PSOs), and AU Liaison Offices (AULOS) remain main modalities of AU’s engagement in such countries, the practice of establishing support mechanisms has also emerged over the years. Notable in this regard is AU Technical Support Team to The Gambia (AUTSTG) and most recently, the AU-led Support Mechanism (AUSM) for Chad to support the reform process in these countries through the deployment of multidisciplinary technical experts. In relation to AULOS, there is a clear trend of increasing emphasis by the Council on the need to enhance institutional capacity of the Liaison Offices in recognition of the critical role they could play in the areas of PCRD. Implementation of Quick Impact Projects (QIPs) and Peace Strengthening Projects (PSPs) in Somalia; the development of Regional Stabilization Strategy for the Lake Chad Basin and the Stabilization Strategy for the Sahel; and AU’s support in the areas of reconciliation and healing (e.g. South Sudan), Disarmament, demobilization and reintegration (DDR), as well as Security Sector Reform (SSR) as in the case of CAR can be cited as some of the best practices in terms of AU’s PCRD interventions.
The AU has made significant strides in its PCRD undertakings, but the persistence of some conflicts and conflict relapse in other cases still highlight the remaining challenges. Resource constraint remains one of the most critical challenges in this regard. In a number of its meetings (e.g. 958th, 670th, and 593rd sessions), the PSC not only flagged up the resource challenge but also underscored the importance of ensuring sustainable and predictable funding for an effective PCRD response. Range of options have been explored to address the resource challenge that include the launch of African Solidarity Initiative (ASI); the establishment of an African PCRD Fund (this was considered by the Council during its 528th meeting); and dedicating a percentage of the AU Peace Fund for PCRD activities as suggested by the Council at its 593rd and 958th sessions. Despite the initiatives, the aspiration for creating self-reliant mechanism to mobilize adequate, sustainable and predictable funding for AU’s PCRD activities remains a long way off.
As noted in Amani Africa’s previous ‘insights on the PSC’, the other challenge relates to the prevalence of political fluidity in countries that are in political transition and conflict situations, as well as absence of nationally owned or led coherent strategy that limit effective delivery of PCRD related support. The third challenge is ensuring coordination and complementarity among the diverse actors involved in the field of PCRD, notably the AU, RECs/RMs, the United Nations Peacebuilding Commission (UNPBC).
The expected outcome of tomorrow’s session is a communiqué. Among others, the Council may commend the progress made in the operationalization of the PCRD Policy Framework since its adoption in 2006. While taking note of the establishment of the PCRD Centre and its significant contribution in reinforcing the implementation of the PCRD Policy, the Council may reiterate the call for the activation of the sub-committee on PCRD. In relation to mobilization of resources, the Council may once again urge for the revitalization of the African Solidarity Initiative further underscoring the need for tapping into and enhancing the engagement of actors such as the African Development Bank (AfDB), international financial institutions, the UN Development Programme (UNDP), the UN Peacebuilding Commission, and the private sector. In addition, the Council may consider providing capacity building in terms of PCRD within the framework of window 2 of the Peace Fund as agreed during the latest PSC Retreat held in Mombasa in May 2021. Furthermore, the Council may highlight the imperative of strong coordination and policy coherence between the AU and RECs/RMs as well as other stakeholders to ensure complementarity and avoid duplication of efforts. Given the central role of national stakeholders including women and youth for PCRD efforts to succeed, the Council may also stress the importance of inclusivity and national ownership.
Joint Consultative Meeting between the AUPSC and the UNPBC
Amani Africa
Date | 11 November, 2021
Tomorrow (11 November), the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) is expected to hold its regular meeting with the United Nations (UN) Peacebuilding Commission (PBC). The Chair of the AUPSC Ambassador Mohammed Gad and the Chair of the UNPBC Ambassador Osama Abdel Khalek are expected to deliver opening remarks. Then, the AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security and Special Representative of the Secretary-General to the AU and Head of the UN Office to the AU (UNOAU), Hanna Tetteh, will brief the meeting. This will be followed by interventions and interactive discussion.
This meeting is taking place during the post-conflict reconstruction and development week launched for the first time by the African Union to allow experts and relevant stakeholders from the peacebuilding and development community “to exchange views on practical ways to support countries in political transition, strengthen their resilience and avoid a relapse into conflict”. Series of events are organized during this week which include the first Annual African Flag Day, a virtual High-Level Seminar on PCRD in Africa and an AUPSC session to examine the Report of the Chairperson of the Commission on the AU’s Efforts on Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Development in Africa.
The last meeting between the AUPSC and the PBC was held virtually on 23 October 2020 where the two bodies exchanged views on how to further enhance cooperation in support of peacebuilding in Africa on the basis of the AU’s policy framework on post-conflict reconstruction and development as well as the UN’s sustaining peace agenda. The meeting took place at the backdrop of the 2020 review of the UN peacebuilding architecture and it recognized the African common position on the review of the peacebuilding architecture. A discussion was also held on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on peacebuilding in Africa, with particular emphasis on the role of women and youth.
The AU-UN partnership in peacebuilding and sustaining peace has been strengthened in recent year within the context of the AU-UN framework on enhanced partnership for peace and security signed in 2017. The then AU peace and security department and the UN peacebuilding support office also signed a memorandum of understanding the same year. Since its establishment, the UNPBC has been supporting the peacebuilding and post-conflict reconstruction efforts of African countries emerging from conflict. It has been considering numerous country specific and thematic issues related to Africa on its agenda. The UN Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) has also provided financial support to several of these countries constituting 66% of PBF’s investments.
The AUPSC and the UNPBC have been meeting annually since 2018. Tomorrow’s meeting is expected to explore UN-AU cooperation in support of political transitions in Africa, including in the Sahel and in the Great Lakes region, according to the concept note prepared to help guide the discussion. This includes how the two organizations can coordinate their efforts across “the full spectrum of preventive action and diplomacy, post-conflict reconstruction and sustainable development” to support political transitions in the continent.
There appears to be keen interest to link the discussion with the Secretary-General’s “common agenda” released in September. The PBC held a discussion with him recently to exchange views on the peacebuilding objectives of his common agenda. The document underscores, among other things, the need to support regional capacities in peacebuilding. It also points out the need to take measures to increase investments in prevention and peacebuilding and dedicate more resources to the Peacebuilding Fund, including through assessed contributions.
The African Union has outlined its priorities on peacebuilding as encapsulated in the common African position on the review of the peacebuilding architecture. One of the priorities is financing for peacebuilding and the CAP supports the proposals by the UN Secretary-General, which among other things, include allocating a certain percentage of assessed contribution to support medium to long-term peacebuilding. The UN General Assembly is expected to hold a high-level meeting next year to consider options for ensuring adequate, predictable and sustainable financing for peacebuilding.
The expected outcome of the consultative meeting is a press statement with solid recommendations for future collaborations between the two organs in the prevention of conflicts, as well as in assisting political transitions and maintaining peace in Africa.
Update on the situation in Northern Ethiopia
Amani Africa
Date | 08 November, 2021
Tomorrow (8 November) the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) will convene an emergency session. The session, prompted by recent changes in the context of the conflict, is set under a theme ‘update on the situation in Northern Ethiopia’.
The session will receive the statement of the AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security, Bankole Adeoye, after the opening remark by the Chairperson of the PSC for the month of November, Mohamed Gad, Permanent Representative of Egypt to the AU. Initially, it was envisaged that former President of Nigeria Olusegun Obasanjo, who was appointed as the AU High Representative for the Horn of Africa in August 2021, would provide the update on the situation in Northern Ethiopia. However, the session may proceed without his briefing due to him traveling to Northern Ethiopia. The Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD) as the concerned regional body and Ethiopia, as the country concerned, are also expected to deliver a statement.
It is to be recalled that in March 2021 during the Heads of State Meeting of the PSC, Ethiopia’s Prime Minister presented a ‘Statement to the African Union Peace and Security Council (AUPSC) on the current situation in Northern Ethiopia. The statement was delivered under AOB and as such there was no formal deliberation on the situation. Tomorrow’s session will thus be the first session for the PSC to deliberate on the situation formally.
The session comes against the background of reports of increasing fighting and in a context of reports of declaration by Tigrian forces of taking control of the towns of Dessie and Kombolcha. On 3 November, the AU Commission Chairperson, Moussa Faki Mahamat, issued a statement calling for ‘the immediate cessation of hostilities, the full respect for the life and property of civilians, as well as state infrastructure.’ The statement additionally called on ‘the parties to urge their supporters against acts of reprisal against any community, and refrain from hate speech and incitement to violence and divisiveness.’ After reminding ‘their obligations regarding compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law, with particular regard to the protection of civilians and ensuring access to humanitarian assistance by communities in need,’ the statement called on ‘the parties to engage with the AU High Representative for the Horn of Africa, former Nigerian President H.E Olusegun Obasanjo.’
In the briefing, it is expected that PSC will be informed about Obasanjo’s engagements on the situation thus far. It is to be recalled that, he briefed the PSC on 28 October broadly on his mandate and plans on execution of the mandate. For purposes of tomorrow’s session, it would be of interest for the PSC to learn about his engagements regarding the situation in Northern Ethiopia, including meetings held with the key stakeholders both in Ethiopia and in the region.
PSC members would in particular be interested to hear about AU’s assessment of the situation and how the PSC lends further support towards AU’s effort to help avert further deterioration of the situation. Recent developments have attracted increased attention both in the region and outside of the region as well. In a statement issued on 4 November, IGAD Executive Secretary, Workneh Gebeyehu, among others, called for the cessation of hostilities and for immediate ceasefire. Kenya also issued a statement appealing ‘to the parties on the urgent need to bring an end of the conflict’. On Friday 5 November, the UN Security Council held a meeting on the situation and issued a statement. Expressing deep concern about the intensification and expansion of military clashes and the impact of the conflict on the humanitarian situation, stability of the country and the region, the statement of the UNSC called for respect for international humanitarian law, for safe and unhindered humanitarian access, the reestablishment of public services, and scaling up of humanitarian assistance. The statement additionally called to put an end to hostilities and to negotiate a lasting ceasefire, and for the creation of conditions for national dialogue.
The expected outcome of the session is a communiqué. The PSC is expected to express concern about the escalation and expansion of the fighting and the human toll of the situation as well as its impact on the stability of the country and the region. Considering the geo-strategic location of the country and the implications of further deteriorations, the PSC may underscore the importance of peace in Ethiopia for the entire region and the continent. The PSC, taking note of efforts and expressions of commitment to address the situation, reiterate the AU Commission Chairpersons call for the cessation of hostilities and the need for starting a political process for ending the escalating fighting. To this end, the PSC may express its support for the role of the AU High-Representative for the Horn of Africa and urge full cooperation for enabling him to help achieve a negotiated settlement.
Protection of Medical Personnel and Facilities in Armed Conflicts
Amani Africa
Date | 05 November, 2021
Tomorrow (5 November), the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) is expected to convene its 1044th session to discuss the protection of medical personnel and medical facilities in the context of armed conflicts.
Following the opening remarks of the PSC Chairperson of the month and Permanent Representative of Egypt to the AU, Mohamed Omar Gad, the AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security (PAPS), Bankole Adeoye, is expected to make a statement. Council is also expected to receive statements from Hanna Tetteh, Special Representative of the United Nations (UN) Secretary General and Head of the UN Office to the AU (UNOAU); Bruce Mokaya, Head of International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) Delegation to the AU; and a Representative of Doctors without Borders.
While this is the first session of the PSC dedicated to the specific theme, Council has at its various previous thematic and country specific sessions condemned attacks on medical personnel and facilities, such as its 862nd and 965th sessions. The protection of medical personnel, units and transport is a core principle stipulated under the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and also forms part of customary International Humanitarian Law (IHL). As such, in both cases of interstate and internal conflicts, attack against medical personnel and facilities engaged in discharging professional activities is prohibited under international law. Moreover, having regard to the growing cases of attacks against healthcare providers and facilities in conflicts, the UN Security Council (UNSC) adopted in 2016, Resolution 2286 which calls on States to “develop effective measures to prevent and address acts of violence, attacks and threats against medical personnel, their means of transport and equipment, as well as hospitals and other medical facilities in armed conflict”. Despite the existence of these and other normative standards necessary for the protection of healthcare in conflict situations, recent trends signify the growing rate of attacks perpetrated against medical personnel and facilities.
As reports indicate, in the period from 2016 to recently, there have been well over 4500 incidents of attacks against healthcare providers and facilities in armed conflicts across the world, which include killings, kidnappings, and sexual assault perpetrated against medical personnel as well as looting, damage and destruction to medical facilities. In Africa, countries such as Central Africa Republic (CAR), Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Libya and Nigeria have experienced the highest rate of attacks. In the DRC for instance, 434 incidents of violence against and obstruction of healthcare were recorded only during the year 2019. Added to the outbreak of Ebola throughout various regions of the country, the impact had been nothing short of catastrophic. In Libya, 77 cases of attacks against and obstruction to healthcare were recorded during 2020. In addition to resulting in injury and death of health workers, these incidents have been cause for multiple hospitals in the country to cease operation, therefore creating serious healthcare vacuum and constraints in the time of Covid-19 pandemic.
While these exemplify incidents that were recorded, it is not hard to imagine that these numbers would increase significantly if unrecorded cases of violence against healthcare in those and other conflict affected countries in the continent were to be considered. Such trend has grave implications not only on medical personnel and facilities, but also on civilian populations in conflict affected areas and their access to humanitarian assistance. This is further aggravated in times of pandemics as has been witnessed in the period from February to December 2020, when the Covid-19 pandemic was at peak. According to data recorded by the ICRC, there were 848 Covid-19 associated violent incidents perpetrated against health workers in that period. It is also important to note that in addition to its immediate impacts, attack on medical facilities also endangers years of developmental efforts and progresses obtained in the medical field.
One of the major reasons behind the persistent attacks against medical personnel and facilities in conflict settings is the lack of awareness and guidance among belligerents regarding the relevant international rules protecting healthcare in armed conflicts. In addition to the lack of awareness of these rules, armed forces are usually not sufficiently trained to understand the overall applicability of IHL, which is fundamental in regulating military operations. Particularly, the basic IHL principles applicable to the conduct of hostilities – distinction, proportionality and precaution – are essential to minimise civilian casualty in conflicts, including healthcare. It is therefore important for States to ensure that the core principles of IHL are made part and parcel of their military doctrines and manuals and that their troops are well trained on abiding these rules throughout any engagement in hostilities. This would contribute towards ensuring that medical personnel and facilities as well as other protected persons and objects under IHL are not deliberately targeted and that their risk of being subject to indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks is minimised. Mandatory and periodic trainings which target senior leadership as well as junior members of States’ armed forces are also important in translating these basic rules and principles into action. On top of training armed forces to identify and avert attacks against healthcare, it is as important for military manuals to provide guidance on how armed forces can assist and provide protection to medical personnel and facilities.
In addition to integrating IHL rules into military manuals, it is also important for States to develop domestic legal frameworks protecting medical personnel and facilities in times of conflicts. This includes particularly rules which emphasise the prestige and significance of emblems such as the Red Cross and Red Crescent movement’s. Such rules would be instrumental in propagating the protected status of medical units, transport and personnel bearing such emblem, thereby protecting them from attacks throughout their operations in conflict settings. Laws which criminalise and prescribe penalties for attacks against and obstruction to healthcare are also necessary not only to deter, but also to fight related impunity and to set precedent of consequences for such acts.
Misconceptions around the provision of neutral and impartial medical treatment in conflict settings also often put medical personnel at risk of attacks. The principles of neutrality and impartiality under IHL oblige health workers to provide medical care to all sick or wounded persons without regard to their status – civilian or combatant/fighter – or their affiliation or lack thereof with either one or more of the conflicting parties. Despite the rule however, medical personnel have in various cases been targeted and attacked by conflicting parties, for providing medical assistance to members of adversary forces or individuals perceived to be affiliated with the “enemy”. This indicates the need for raised awareness regarding not only the obligation of medical personnel to provide care without distinction based on affiliations, but also regarding Geneva Convention I and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions which provide for the protection and humane treatment of persons not taking active part in conflicts, including those rendered “hors de combat” due to wounds or sickness.
Both States and non-State armed forces have been implicated in multiple armed conflicts for attacks on medical personnel and facilities. It is therefore important to emphasise and support initiatives of impartial and neutral organisations to create awareness of domestic and international norms protecting healthcare in the context of conflicts to ensure that belligerent parties comply with such norms.
The outcome of tomorrow’s session will be a communiqué. The PSC may express concern over the growing rate of attacks against medical personnel and facilities in situations of armed conflicts in Africa. Council may urge member States to ensure increased efforts towards raising awareness on international standards protecting medical personnel and facilities in the context of conflicts. It may also call on member States to strengthen domestic laws and military doctrines to sufficiently integrate IHL rules on the protection of healthcare in armed conflicts and to fight impunity and ensure that violations are properly addressed. It may also encourage member States to report on implementation of Resolution 2286(2016) of the UNSC. Moreover, Council may urge both State and non-State conflicting parties to put their best efforts towards minimising civilian casualty from their engagement in hostilities, including to health workers and medical facilities, and to ensure that medical personnel are granted safe environment to provide medical care and assistance to all in need, in a neutral and impartial manner.
