Discussion on Financing AU Peace Support Operations in Africa
Discussion on Financing AU Peace Support Operations in Africa
Date | 12 May 2023
Tomorrow (12 May), the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) will convene its 1153rd session at a ministerial level to discuss the issue of financing AU Peace Support Operations (PSOs) in Africa.
Uganda’s minister of Foreign Affairs, Odongo Jeje Abubakhar, Chairperson of the PSC for the month of May, is expected to open the session followed by remarks from Bankole Adeoye, AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security (PAPS), as well as remarks from Mohammed El-Amine Souef, the Special Representative of the Chairperson of the Commission for Somalia and Head of AU Transition Mission in Somalia (ATMIS). Parfait Onanga-Anyanga, the Special Representative of the Secretary-General (SRSG) and Head of UN Office to the AU (UNOAU) is expected to address the PSC and provide overview of the Secretary-General’s report released early this month. The representative of the European Union (EU) could be also among the speakers.
The session on financing AU PSOs comes in the context of a new momentum for the resumption of negotiation on a framework UNSC resolution on financing of AU-led PSOs that has stalled since 2019. In February of this year, the 36th ordinary session of the AU Assembly adopted what the AU referred to as ‘African consensus paper on predictable, adequate, and sustainable financing for African Union peace and security activities.’ On 1 May, the UN Secretary-General officially released the report on the Implementation of UNSC resolutions 2320(2016) and 2378(2017), which is scheduled to be considered by the UNSC on 25 May. These two documents set the stage for starting the negotiation on a UNSC framework resolution that secures concrete commitment from the Council on the use of UN assessed contributions for AU-led PSOs.
Happening at the ministerial level, tomorrow’s session presents the PSC the opportunity to provide strategic guidance on how to take forward the agenda of financing within the UNSC and the respective roles and responsibilities of the various AU actors in that regard. It could also serve as a platform for the PSC to create awareness and shared understanding on some of the key issues highlighted in the two documents and those areas that may require further engagement and negotiated compromise.
There are around four issues, which all received attention in the two documents and are expected to required further engagement. The first of this has to do with burden sharing. This relates to the percentage of the budget of AU-led PSO supported by UN funding that the AU contributes to. One of the issues in this regard was the clarification needed on contribution of 25 % of PSOs budget. The Consensus Paper stated that the 25% of AU’s budget would be dedicated to supporting ‘priority initiatives of the AU in support of peace and security efforts on the continent.’ From the 25% of the Union’s annual budget that is committed to the overall peace and security work of the AU, the budget for PSOs is expected to cover the preparation stage of AU led PSOs.
During the session, member states may also raise the question of various unaccounted costs that they absorb when deploying for PSOs. As highlighted in Amani Africa’s latest report, there may also be a need for the AU to commit to a percentage of the financial burden of the PSOs that will be supported by UN assessed contributions. The PSC may thus need to consider how to provide further clarification that specifies the percentage of the cost of the peace operations that AU’s contribution constitutes even if this would be a percentage that is symbolic of AU’s willingness for burden sharing.
On the financing model, the Consensus Paper proposed three financing options. The first model is the establishment of AU-UN Hybrid mission based on the UNAMID experience. The second model is what the Consensus Paper described as an ‘Enhanced UN Logistics Support Package (LSP)’ – a financing option that has been tested in Somalia since 2009 to support AMISOM/ATMIS but with the support additionally covering monthly stipends to the police and military components as well as death and disability compensation (AMISOM/ATMIS plus model). While these two converge with the two financing options supported by the Secretary-General’s report, the Consensus Paper additionally envisaged that sub-regional peace support operations also benefit from UN assessed contributions. The Secretary-General’s report does not close the door for such operations but requires that such operations are brought under AU decision-making and financial management frameworks.
The other area is the question of decision-making, oversight and command and control, which does not seem to be sufficiently reflected in the consensus paper. Previous negotiations on the matter highlighted the disagreement between AU and UN over who provides the strategic and political guidance to the AU-led PSOs that are primarily funded through UN assessed contributions. The view on the part of the AU is that its deployment of PSOs using UN assessed contributions should not be seen as just a sub-contracting by the UN of its peace operations responsibility to the AU. As such it expects to exercise a level of control over the PSOs it deploys under UNSC authorization and UN assessed contributions support. The Secretary-General’s paper provides a diagram of the decision-making process and acknowledges the authority of the AU. What the scope of this control by AU would be clear when negotiating the language in the draft resolution.
The other issue related to the strengthening of human rights compliance and financial transparency and accountability mechanisms. Both the Consensus Paper and the Secretary-General’s repot provide updates on the progress made in this respect by the AU meeting the expectations set in the two UNSC 2016 and 2017 resolutions. It is expected that the PSC will welcome the Secretary-General’s report and call on the UNSC to heed the call of the Secretary-General and adopt the resolution on financing of AU-led PSOs through UN assessed contributions.
In terms of next steps, it would also be of interest for PSC on the process and arrangements that should be put in place for sustained consultation and close coordination. The various consultations would understandably need to be organized in a way that addresses the specific areas of concern of various role players. The PSC may in this respect welcome the roadmap that the A3 have prepared. It may also call for creating a dedicated standing coordination arrangement to ensure close coordination of the AU Commission, the PSC, the A3, the AU Permanent Observer Mission to UN and the wider Africa Group in New York throughout the negotiation process for having a UNSC resolution that adequately reflects AU’s position.
The expected outcome of tomorrow’s session is a communique. The PSC is expected to reiterate the key aspects of the consensus paper, including AU’s understanding of the 25% commitment, the different financing options outlined; progress made in addressing some of the concerns raised in previous negotiation on the matter. PSC may welcome the Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of UNSC resolutions 2320 and 2378 and may endorse the strong call of the Secretary-General for the UNSC to adopt a resolution on use of assessed contributions for AU-led peace support operations authorized by the UNSC. The PSC may also authorize the A3 to resuscitate the negotiations on the resolution on the basis of the Consensus Paper and the Secretary-General’s report, which was developed in close coordination with the AU Commission. For ensuring close & sustained consultation and ensure that the various AU actors speak with one voice, the PSC may call for the establishment of a standing consultation and coordination arrangement dedicated to this file and for the duration of the negotiations. At the level of the PSC, it may decide to have this agenda to be a regular item of the monthly program of work of the PSC every month until the conclusion of the negotiations on the draft resolution and establish a committee made up of three to five members involving Ghana as a state with membership in both the PSC and the UNSC. Considering that the negotiation over the resolution is also political as the Secretary-General’s report underscored and the strategic significance of this file, the PSC may call for the AU Commission and member states to be seized of, provide leadership and take active part throughout the negotiation process at the highest levels.
Briefing by the Panel of the Wise on its Mission to Chad
Briefing by the Panel of the Wise on its Mission to Chad
Date | 11 May 2023
Tomorrow (11 May) the African Union (AU) Peace and Security Council (PSC) will convene its 1152nd session and it is expected to receive a briefing by the Panel of the Wise on its mission to Chad.
Following the opening remark of the PSC Chairperson for May, Uganda’s Permanent Representative to the AU, Rebecca Otengo, AU Commissioner for Political Affairs, Peace and Security, Bankole Adeoye is expected to deliver a statement. Domitian Ndayizeye, Chairperson of the 5th Panel of the Wise is expected to present the findings of the report. Gabon as the Chair of Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) may also make a statement. Representative of Chad as a country concerned may also make an intervention.
This will be the second briefing by the Panel of Wise to the PSC in 2023. In March 2023 the Panel delivered a briefing at PSC’s ministerial session, on its activities in preventive diplomacy and early warning. Tomorrow’s briefing will specifically focus on its findings from the mission it conducted in Chad.
This session is taking place six month after PSC’s session dedicated on the situation in Chad. It is to be recalled that on 11 November, the PSC held its 1121st session and one of the agenda items that it deliberated on was the situation in Chad. The session was held a month after Chad’s national dialogue forum, which was boycotted by major opposition actors, announced the extension of the transitional period until 2024 and also declared the eligibility of members of the Transitional Military Committee in the country’s elections. Despite the breach of the conditions set by the PSC which were clearly articulated during its 1106th session, the PSC was unable to reach consensus on the kind of measure to take in response to the developments in Chad. The meeting held on 11 November was adjourned after a prolonged deliberation. The PSC held another meeting on 30 November in which it released a press statement mandating the Panel ‘to gather first-hand information, in consultation with all relevant stakeholders on the ground and brief the Council’.
It is against this background that the Panel has undertaken a mission to Chad between 12-18 March, following PSC’s decision in November. The briefing is expected to highlight the Panel’s findings with respect to the outcome of Chad’s national dialogue, particularly in relation to the duration of the transition period and the participation of members of the Military Council in the election that is expected to take place at the end of the transition phase. The Panel may provide further details on aspects related to the drafting of a new constitution and in relation to election timetable.
One important element that was missing in the press statement of the PSC but one that members may wish to raise is the killing of protestors on 20 October and the repression that followed. The government violent crackdown has led to the mass arrest and trial of about 400 people in Koro Toro prison, a remote location away from the capital. Following the violence and the killings, the Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS) has launched an investigation, although rights groups in the country have expressed their reservation on the independence of the inquiry. However, the repression has continued, authorities have also detained military officers and the president of the Chadian Organization of Human Rights over their alleged attempt to destabilize the country.
An emerging issue that did not form part of the Panel’s mission, but one that may be of interest to PSC members is the recent development in Sudan and the implication it may have on the security and humanitarian situation in Chad and in the political transition of the country. Both Sudan and Chad are experiencing an extended and fragile political transition and both have experienced recurrent instability in their respective regions. The two countries share border and historical ties. Both are susceptible to the insecurity along their border and with the crisis in Sudan there is rising concern in N’Djamena on the implication it may have on the operations of rebel forces in Chad. The increased presence of the Rapid Support Forces in border areas had heightened the tension between the two countries which prompted the two transition leaders to agree on joint patrols of their armies. However, with a protracted crisis in Sudan there is also a high potential for the instability to spillover to Chad as well and affect the fragile political transition.
It is to be recalled that in 2022 August prior to the launch of the national dialogue, the military government in Chad has signed an agreement with various rebel groups. However, one of the main groups the Front for Change and Concord in Chad (FACT) has refused to be part of the agreement. While the transition authority has made efforts in reconciling with the different armed groups, many still remain active and a new group has emerged in areas bordering Central Africa Republic. With these forces in the country and the increased volatility of Sudan may create unease for the transition authorities. Potentially, the security developments in the region may also divert the attention from the transitional process in Chad and may even potentially be used as pretext to further intensify power consolidation and repression of opposition forces.
On the other hand, the humanitarian aspect is also an area which is expected to be affected. Chad is already hosting about 400,000 refugees from Sudan and it is expected to receive another influx of refugees with the rising insecurity in the neighboring country. This adds further strain to an already dire humanitarian condition in Chad.
The expected outcome is a communique. The PSC may take note of the report of the Panel of the Wise on its mission to Chad. The PSC may also note the various developments in the region and their risks to the transition process in Chad. The PSC may reiterate its zero tolerance to any form of unconstitutional change of government. The PSC may reiterate its previous decisions and conditions it has set for the transition government. Based on the findings of the Panel, the PSC may call on the head of the TMC and the members to honor their commitments not to run for election. The PSC may urge Chadian authorities to ensure inclusivity in the transition process and in the preparation for the electoral process. The PSC may condemn the political repression and heavy crackdown by security forces on civilian population. It may urge the transition authorities to ensure the respect and protection of human rights of citizens. It may call on the AUC in close collaboration with ECCAS to scale up its support to the political transition in Chad.
Seizing the New Momentum for UNSC Resolution on UN funding of AU Peace Operations
Amani Africa
May 10, 2023
This special research report seeks to examine how the AU Consensus Paper and the Secretary-General’s report advance the consideration of the draft resolution in the UNSC, the issues that may still require further engagement and negotiated compromise, the next steps in the process for updating and presenting the draft resolution, and the role expected of various African policy actors for running smooth and effective show in the negotiation process.
SAISIR LE NOUVEL ELAN POUR UNE RESOLUTION DU CSNU SUR LE FINANCEMENT DES OPERATIONS DE PAIX DE L'UA
Amani Africa
10 Mai 2023
Il y a un nouvel élan pour la reprise des négociations sur une résolution-cadre du Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies (CSNU) sur le financement des opérations de soutien à la paix sous conduite de l’Union africaine (UA) et autorisées par le CSNU, quatre ans après l’échec de la dernière tentative d’obtenir une telle résolution en 2019. Suite à l’absence de consensus et de clarté autour des questions clés soulevées dans la résolution proposée et à la menace de veto des États-Unis d’Amérique sous l’administration Trump, le Conseil de paix et de sécurité (CPS) de l’UA à travers son président pour le mois de septembre 2019, le Maroc, a demandé aux 3 membres africains (A3) du CSNU de suspendre le processus de négociation du projet de résolution présenté par l’Afrique du Sud. Outre l’accusation selon laquelle la version de la résolution qui était à l’examen édulcore sérieusement la version du projet de résolution que les A3, menés par l’Ethiopie, ont mise en bleu en décembre 2018, les principales questions qui ont conduit à la décision du CPS de suspendre les négociations sont la divergence de vues sur la compréhension de l’engagement de l’UA de contribuer à hauteur de 25 % du budget des opérations de soutien à la paix et la division du travail entre le CPS et le CSNU, en particulier en ce qui concerne le degré d’autonomie de l’UA pour l’exercice d’un niveau de contrôle sur les opérations de soutien à la paix qu’elle déploie sous autorisation du CSNU.
Seizing the New Momentum for UNSC Resolution on UN funding of AU Peace Operations
Amani Africa
May 10, 2023
This special research report seeks to examine how the AU Consensus Paper and the Secretary-General’s report advance the consideration of the draft resolution in the UNSC, the issues that may still require further engagement and negotiated compromise, the next steps in the process for updating and presenting the draft resolution, and the role expected of various African policy actors for running smooth and effective show in the negotiation process.