Consideration of outcome of the MSC meeting on the harmonization of ACIRC and   ASF

APSA Tools and Pillars

Date | 18 December, 2018

Tomorrow (19 November) the Peace and Security Council (PSC) is scheduled to have a session for considering the summary records of the meeting of its Military Staff Committee (MSC) on the harmonization of the African Capacity for Immediate Response to Crisis (ACIRC) within the African Standby Force (ASF).

It is to be recalled that the PSC at its 795th session decided that the MSC of the PSC convenes a meeting to ‘identify and propose ways and means of fully implementing Assembly Decisions 679 and 695 and to make appropriate recommendations, including timelines and roadmap, to guide the PSC on how to overcome the challenges facing the harmonization of the ACIRC within the ASF’. Acting on this decision, the MSC held on 5 October 2018the meeting for working on the task the PSC entrusted to it.

Although it has been introduced in 2013 as a gap filling measure for availing the AU a rapid response capability pending the full operationalization of the ASF, in the years that follow divisions emerged over the role of ACIRC and its relationship with and implications on the African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA) in general and the ASF in particular. While countries participating in ACIRC viewed it as availing the AU pragmatic capability for rapid response based on the concept of coalition of the willing organized around a lead nation, others came to view ACIRC as diverting attention from the operationalization of the ASF and carrying the risk of fragmenting or undermining the APSA framework. Some RECs/RMs, such as ECOWAS, ECCAS and EASFCOM, have in particular been critical of ACIRC both for lack of their participation in its establishment and for their exclusion in its operationalization and potential utilization. The Specialized Technical Committee on Defense, Safety and Security (STCDSS), during its seventh meeting held on 14 January 2014 in Addis Ababa, recommended that both the ACIRC and the ASF RDC concepts should be harmonized to avoid duplication of efforts and ensure that the ACIRC assists in expediting the operationalization process of the RDC. In 2015, the Report of the Independent Panel of Experts’ Assessment of the African Standby Force recommended that the AU Commission ‘takes steps to harmonise and integrate the ACIRC into the ASF model, as an additional tool for further enhancing the AU’s capacity to respond rapidly to Scenario Six-type mass atrocity crimes, and that it be synchronised with the ASF’s national or stand-alone RDC (Rapid Deployment Capacity) model.’

Subsequently, the AU Assembly adopted decision 679 which called on all stakeholders to support the realization of the full operationalization of the ASF, and harmonization of the activities of ACIRC with the Framework of the ASF and enhance cooperation with all ad-hoc coalitions namely, the Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) against Boko Haram terrorist group, Group of Five Sahel Joint Force and the Regional Cooperation Initiative against the Lord’s Resistance Army (RCI-LRA), and requested the Commission to submit a plan on the harmonization of ACIRC into ASF, including steps to be taken by the AU and the Regional Economic Communities/Regional Mechanisms for Conflict Prevention (RECs/RMs) to coordinate ad-hoc the Protocol Relating to the Establishment of the Peace and Security Council of the African Union.’

Despite the policy decisions, the actual implementation of the harmonization of ACIRC within the ASF has faced challenging questions of political, legal and resource preconditions. Various institutional, technical, human and financial inputs have been put in place for putting ACIRC in place. An ACIRC PLANELM within the Peace Support Operations Division (PSOD) of the AU Commission in Addis Ababa has been established. Politically, it remains unclear that all ACIRC participating countries are convinced that ACIRC merges into the ASF RDC. The legal issue pertains to the memorandum of understanding that the AU may need to sign with ACIRC members on the integration and use of their pledged capabilities within the ASF. It is also imperative that the harmonization addresses the question of what happens to the various technical, logistical and institutional resources, including the personnel making up the ACIRC PLANELM, currently servicing the ACIRC.

These were the issues that the 5 October meeting MSC considered with the Defense Attaché of the Congo chairing by virtue of the fact that Congo was the PSC chair of the month. Premised on the understanding that harmonization means integration of the ACIRC into the ASF, the meeting of the MSC proposed the steps to be taken and the accompanying timeline for implementing the harmonization. The steps to be taken consist broadly of a) communication by the AUC to ACIRC countries (for their contributions), AU member states (urging them to comply with Assembly decisions 679 and 695) and partners (notifying them of the merger of ACIRC and ASF), b) the legal process to be followed (in terms of review of existing legal frameworks between AU and ACIRC countries and reporting to the PSC in May 2019), the approach to the re-deployment of the assets and resources of ACIRC into the ASF, and the measures to be taken at the level of the PSOD, RECs/RMs and finally the AU Assembly.
These various steps are envisaged to run from November 2018 to February 2020 when the AU Assembly is expected to make final pronouncement. The integration of ACIRC into the ASF seems to fit the ongoing AU reform process that seeks to avoid duplication and ensure mainstreaming of efforts. Yet, some of these issues such as the proposal on integrating the human resources of the ACIRC PLANLEM into PSOD are likely to trigger discussion from the perspective of the human resource regulations of the AU.

The Defense Attaché of Congo is expected to present the summary record of the MSC meeting. The AU Peace and Security Department is also expected to make a statement. The expected outcome of the session is a communiqué. The PSC may endorse the proposed steps with amendments with a request for the AUC to develop and implement a roadmap based on the steps and timelines set and to report periodically on progress.

PSC Briefing on the Harmonization of the ACIRC within the ASF Framework

APSA Tools and Pillars

Date | 18 September, 2018

Tomorrow  (19  September)  the  Peace  and  Security  Council (PSC) of the African Union (AU) will hold a briefing on the harmonization of the African Capacity for Rapid  Intervention  in  Crises  (ACRIC)  within  the  African  Standby Force (ASF) framework. Convened on the request  of  Nigeria,  the  meeting  will  examine  the  conceptual, structural and institutional harmonization of the  ASF  and  ACIRC.  The  session  will  also  evaluate  the  progress made by the two mechanisms since the last briefing  to  the  PSC.  The  meeting  will  receive  a  briefing  from the Peace and Security Department (PSD)’s Peace Support Operations Division (PSOD).

The meeting is held in line with the decision 695 of the AU  Assembly  meeting  in  Nouakchott,  which  requested  quarterly progress update on implementation of decision 679 of the 30th ordinary session of the Assembly.

The  meeting  will  also  receive  updates  from  the  Secretariat of ACRIC in PSOD on the state of the ACIRC, its  relations  with  the  ASF  mechanism  and  recent  developments in the implementation of the Maputo Strategic  Work  Plan  on  the  Enhancement  of  the  ASF  (2016‐2020). The five‐year work plan for the ASF highlighted  the  changing  security  environment  and  threats on the continent. Its recommendation for dynamism  into  the  design  and  structure  of  the  ASF  to  respond to the challenges goes in line with the initiative to  harmonize  the  ASF  with  the  ACIRC.  The  session  will  use the indicators, deliverables and timelines defined by the  five‐year  work  plan  as  a  reference  to  evaluate  the  move towards harmonization of ACRIC with ASF, particularly  its  rapid  deployment  capability  (RDC).  The  training, exercises, airlift and mission support capabilities of  the  regional  forces  and  their  progress  in  articulating  the command structure and control, and logistical capabilities  of  the  ASF  and  ACIRC  will  also  be  discussed  by the session.

The  discussion  and  debate  of  the  meeting  will  focus  on  the complex relationship between the ASF and ACRIC. Divisions still exist among the member states of the AU and  within  the  AU  Commission  on  the  relevance,  role,  interaction and the need for keeping the two as parallel initiatives.  There  is  an  opinion  that  sees  ACIRC  as  a  redundancy, an admission of failure to fully operationalize the ASF, and questions the value addition of  the  ACIRC.  This  view  sees  the  2013  initiative  as  a  project that diverts and distracts the attention, energy, resources  and  political  focus  of  the  continent  and  partners that should have been spent on realizing the ASF.  Those  participating  in  ACRIC  consider  the  mechanism as providing the mechanism for rapid mobilization and more flexibility (compared to the region based and relatively more region approach of the ASF) in cases emergency situations.

Despite  its  success  for  standardization,  training  and  mobilization of peace support mission in Africa, security challenges in the continent have revealed the weakness of the ASF in rapidly deploying troops. Harmonizing the ASF  and  ACIRC  will  primarily  focus  on  addressing  this  structural gap. The conversation on the ASF and ACIRC dynamics is taking place while the continent is witnessing a sweeping trend of relying on ad‐hoc regional coalitions and  deployment  arrangements  and  alliances  as  a  rapid  response mechanism. The meeting is expected to address  these  trend  in  the  context  of  the  effort  for  harmonization of the ASF and ACRIC.

While  peace  support  operations  serve  as  a  vital  tool  of  crisis response, changing security dynamics and trans‐regional nature of emerging security threats demand a more flexible, agile and effective missions. The possibility of an effective transfer of responsibility to local security forces and institutions, and withdrawal of missions with an extended presence and limited effectiveness still look distant.  These  conditions  and  reality  significantly  affected the reputation and effectiveness of the traditional peace support operations in Africa, and called for a revision of the existing practice and arrangements. The  threat  posed  by  transnational  terrorist  groups  and  non‐state actors need a ‘fit for purpose’ and tailor made mandated  approach,  which  is  currently  lacking  in  the  traditional African Union and UN missions in Africa.

Tomorrow’s  meeting  will  examine  the  ASF‐ACRIC  harmonization as a response to the question of effectiveness  and  sustainability  of  peace  support  operations in the continent. Reviewing the design and structure  of  the  ASF  in  a  way  that  enhances  its  deployment capabilities and mission effectiveness including the ACIRC as its component is seen by the AU as a way forward. An important aspect of this session is also  finding  a  balance  between  rapid  and  flexible  regional initiatives and overarching standards and principles developed within the framework of the ASF.
Also  important  for  tomorrow’s  session  is  tailor  made  interventions with greater emphasis on political initiatives underscoring the imperative of the primacy of political  strategy  over  military  or  security  approaches.  These include integrating and enhancing the role of preventive  diplomacy  and  mediation  mechanisms,  the  African Governance Architecture (AGA), Africa’s normative  framework  to  constitutionalism  and  inclusive  governance. Enabling national institutions is critical in the path from conflict to sustained peace, and should be part and parcel of the ASF‐ACIRC harmonization.

The expected outcome of the briefing is a communiqué. The  communiqué  may  stipulate  a  timeline  for  finalizing  the harmonization of ACRIC within the ASF and for all efforts at the levels of the AU and regions to focus on the full  operationalization  of  the  ASF  with  necessary  adjustments for flexible, rapid and effective utilization of ASF in response to emerging crisis.

PSC Briefing on the AU Peace Fund

APSA Tools and Pillars

Date | 02 May, 2018

Tomorrow (2 May) the PSC will hold a briefing session on the AU Peace Fund. The AU Special Envoy on the Financing of the African Union (AU) and the Peace Fund, Donald Kaberuka, will brief the PSC providing updates on the status of operationalization of the Peace Fund.

The AU Assembly at its 24th and 25th Ordinary Sessions adopted decisions expressing the agreement of AU member states to contribute 25% of the financing for AU peace and security efforts, including peace support operations. In its Decision Assembly/AU/Dec.605(XXVII) on the financing of the Union adopted at its 27th Ordinary Session held in July 2016 in Kigali, which decided to endow the AU Peace Fund with $400m by 2020.In this session the Special Envoy will update the PSC on the progress made in the contribution of member states to the Peace Fund.

Although implementation was meant to start as of 2017, the F10+ (the Committee of the 15 Finance Ministers) decided a transitional period with a target amount of $65 million for the Peace Fund for the year 2017. Of this amount, some $40 million has thus far been collected. Issues of interest for member states in this regard include when and how the amount collected would start to be used and the institutional and decision-making measures required to this end. Also of interest to PSC members is the strategy for realizing the collection of both the full initial targeted amount and the July 2016 decision to endow the Peace Fund with $400m by 2020. In this respect, the briefing session is expected to note the January 2018 summit decision that ‘member states annual contributions to the Peace Fund shall be made on the basis of the AU Scale of Assessment’. It is expected that the AU would have a new scale of assessment from 2019.

It is to be recalled that the PSC at its 30 May 2017 session decided the Peace Fund to have three (3) thematic windows, namely Mediation and Preventive Diplomacy; Institutional Capacity; and Peace Support Operations, as well as the Crisis Reserve facility provided for in Article 21 (4) of the PSC protocol and envisaged to fund rapid response to emergency crisis. As a follow up to that, this session is expected to highlight progress made in organizing the Peace Fund around these three windows in particular in terms of determining the scope and eligibility criteria for the windows.

Another area that Kaberuka’s briefing would provide update on is the progress in the establishment and operationalization of the various institutional set up and governance structures of the Peace Fund as well as legal instruments including financial rules governing the fund. In terms of the legal instruments, the briefing is expected to inform the PSC that a Peace Fund Instrument codifying the enhanced governance and management arrangements was developed and reviewed by AU Legal Counsel in August 2017 and has since been adopted in the January 2018 AU summit decision Assembly/AU/ Dec.9(XXX).

As endorsed by the May 2017 PSC session and the July 2017 Summit of the AU Assembly, the institutional set up and governance structures of the PSC envisage both political level role players and the strategic and operational governance structures of the Peace Fund.

Political oversight lies with the PSC with the support of the AU Commission Chairperson. As these structures and their roles are already in operation including in terms of mandating and decision-making authority, much of the work in terms of institutional set up and governance structures relate to the establishment and operationalization of the structures that ensure transparent and efficient administration of the fund and the running of the day to day operations of the Peace Fund. The first of these structures is the Board of Trustees.

As proposed in Kaberuka’s report on the revitalization of the Peace Fund, the Board of Trustees consist of the Chair and Deputy Chair of the AUC, the Commissioner for Peace and Security and non-executive members of eminent persons on peace and security and up to two non-African partners contributing to the peace fund. The briefing for this session is expected to inform the PSC on the progress made both in the consultations of the AU Commission Chair with the deans of the five regions of Africa on the identification of African members of the Board of Trustees and generally in elaborating the terms of reference and constituting the membership of the Board. Other structures envisaged included the independent evaluation group in respect of which the status of nomination of the group would be of interest in this session.

While at strategic level, the AUC Chairperson assisted by an Executive Management Committee oversees the operations of the Fund, at the operational level, it is envisaged that the Peace Fund would have its own secretariat. The structural proposals for the establishment of the secretariat is envisaged to be considered as part of the ongoing AU reform process during the course of this year.

This is indeed one of the items on which this briefing is expected to shed some light in terms of where the process stands and when the secretariat is expected to be operational.

There are also other areas the briefing is anticipated to touch on. One such area is the human rights and code of conduct compliance framework for AU peace operations. Related to this and particularly important is the follow up to the PSC’s request to the AUC Chair and the Special Envoy to take forward the political engagement with United Nations and relevant partners. This in particular concerns the adoption by the UN of ‘a substantive Resolution that establishes the principle that AU mandated or authorized PSOs authorized by the UN Security Council should be financed through UN assessed contributions, with decisions on the financing of specific missions to be taken on a case by case basis towards securing a substantive UNSC resolution on these issues’.

The expected outcome of the briefing session is a communiqué. Apart from endorsing items as may be proposed in the briefing such as on the utilization of funds in the Peace Fund, it would build on the 30 May 2017 communiqué on areas for further follow up not only on the operationalization of the structures of the Peace Fund but also on the substantive resolution expected from the UN.

Operationalization of the African Standby Force

APSA Tools and Pillars

Date | 24 April, 2018

Briefing on the ASF

Tomorrow (25 April), the Peace and Security Council (PSC) of the African Union (AU) will hold a briefing on ‘the operationalization of the African Standby Force (ASF)’. The meeting will evaluate the state of readiness of Regional Standby Forces and progress made since the last briefing to the PSC. The meeting is a follow up to the decision of the PSC and Executive Council on regular updating of the PSC on the ASF.

The Peace Support Operations Division (PSOD) is also expected to provide updates to the PSC. The focus of this briefing will be on works done at the level of the AU including in respect to the implementation of the Maputo Strategic Work Plan on the Enhancement of the ASF (2016-2020). The five-year work plan for the ASF highlighted the changing security environment and threats on the continent and outlined the dynamism and changes needed into the design and structure of the ASF to respond to the challenges. The Council will examine the progress made based on the indicators, deliverables and timelines put by the work plan. It is also expected in particular to update the PSC on progress made in elaborating AU-RECs/RMs agreement on decision-making processes on the deployment of the ASF and the launch in January 2018 of the Continental Logistics Base in Cameroon.

In its last session on the ASF held on 21 July 2017, the PSC also anticipated to review the Report of the Commission on the verification, confirmation and validation of pledged capabilities of the ASF that Professor Ibrahim Gambari led. In the light of the discussion on adapting the design and structure of the ASF with an objective of enhancing its deployment capabilities and mission effectiveness, the briefing session is expected to discuss the updates in this process.

With respect to the RECs/RMs, some member states expressed the need for the RECs/RMs to update the PSC themselves on the level of preparedness of their regional forces. In the Executive Council’s Declaration on the 10th Ordinary Meeting of the Specialized Technical Committee on Defense, Safety and Security (STCDSS), RECs/RMs are urged ‘to provide regular updates to the AU Peace and Security Council on their Regional Standby Forces and attend PSC sessions as required’. The PSC Secretariat has sent out invitations to the heads of the Regional Economic Communities and Regional Mechanisms (RECs/RMs).

The main part of the briefing will be a progress report by the chairs and representatives of the five RECs/RMs. The Eastern Africa Standby Force (EASF), Economic Community of Central African States (ECCAS), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), North African Regional Capability (NARC) and Southern African Development Community (SADC) are expected to make presentations on the status of the regional brigades and the training, financing, and mobilization capacities of their respective regional forces. The statements and subsequent exchanges are also expected to cover training and exercises, airlift and mission support capabilities of the regional forces. The difficult issue of command structure and control, and matters related with logistics will also be topics that will feature in the meeting.

Despite regional differences and uneven developments of regional brigades by the regional mechanisms notably NARC, the ASF proved to be a great mechanism to build a permanent infrastructure for standardization, training and mobilization of peacekeeping in Africa. The ECOWAS, EASF and SADC are regions that showed relative progress while central and northern Africa are significantly lagging.

However, the structure of the force, and its place in the APSA is a matter of ongoing conversation at the PSC. The AU member states are relying on ad-hoc regional coalitions and deployment arrangements and alliances even after the official declaration of the operationalization of the ASF. There are various issues that member states of the PSC would raise in regard to these developments. The first is the relationship of these ad hoc arrangements with the ASF framework. In its January 2018 Declaration on the meeting of the STCDSS, the Executive Council called for the harmonization enhance cooperation with all ad-hoc coalitions, namely, MNJTF, Group of Five Sahel Joint Force and RCILRA.

There is also the issue of African Capacity for Rapid Intervention in Crises (ACIRC). There are member states who see it as an initiative that diverts and distracts the attention, energy, resources and political focus of the continent from the ASF. Although the AU Commission or the RECs/RMs may not be in a position to provide full answer, a second and related issue for discussion is the harmonization of the activities of (ACIRC) with the Framework of the ASF.

Finally, there is also the issue of the mandating and deployment of the ASF for AU peace support operations including the ad hoc coalitions within the framework of the Constitutive Act and the Protocol Establishing the PSC. In this respect, the briefing in the PSC is expected to cover how new initiatives are being aliened with the processes envisaged in AU founding instruments. A recent major development has been the Memorandum of Understanding signed between Smaïl Chergui, AU Commissioner for Peace and Security and Maman Sidiko, Executive Secretary of the G5 Sahel Secretariat on 25 March 2018.

The expected outcome of the briefing is a communiqué. It is anticipated to give guidance on the follow up to the various decisions including notably the process of alignment, harmonization and coherence of decision-making and mandating process between AU and RECs/RMs and the finalization of the draft ASF Legal Framework.

Briefing on Peace Support Operations in Africa

APSA Tools and Pillars

Date | 13 April, 2018

Peace Support Operations in Africa

Today (13 April) at 3:30pm the Peace and Security Council (PSC) will hold a briefing session on peace support operations in Africa. The Council will receive a briefing from the Smaïl Chergui, African Union (AU) Commissioner for Peace and Security and Jean-Pierre Lacroix, the United Nations (UN) Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations.

It is expected that the briefing would have two dimensions. The first of this and the main focus of the briefing is the recent joint field visits that Chergui and Lacroix undertook including to Darfur where UN-AU have their joint mission UNAMID and the Central African Republic. As a practical manifestation of the implementation of the AU-UN partnership, it is also anticipated that the briefing session would highlight efforts at implementing enhanced partnership between the two organizations.

Chergui and Lacroix have been on a joint filed visit to Sudan with a focus on the joint UN-AU Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) and in the Central African Republic (CAR) where the UN runs a mission, MINUSCA and the AU leads the African Initiative for Peace and Reconciliation in the CAR. In their joint briefing, Chergui and Lacroix are expected to explain to the PSC the current state of the peace and security situation in Sudan, Darfur and CAR, and on challenges and the next steps.

With respect to Sudan, particular attention would focus on not only the process of the withdrawal of UNAMID but also the effort for political solution to the situation. They are expected to indicate how the AU and the UN jointly support the stabilization and restoration of peace in Darfur. In terms of the visit to the CAR, the two are expected to brief the PSC on the security situation in the CAR including the recent incident of fighting that ensued when CAR and MINUSCA undertook an operation. The two arrive in Bangui while the situation on the ground was tense. On 11 April, they issued a joint statement on the situation expressing concern about persistent tensions in the PK5 neighborhood of Bangui and explaining that ‘the operations conducted by the Government and MINUSCA on 8 April were aimed at putting an end to the activities of criminal elements that endanger the lives of peaceful citizens, in a neighborhood that is also the economic hub of Bangui.’

Both the AU and the UN have each got a new leadership in the past year. Both Antonio Guterres, UN’s Secretary-General and Moussa Faki Mahamat, AU Commission Chairperson, have expressed commitment for enhancing the partnership of the two organizations on peace and security in Africa. Exactly a year ago, the two leaders signed a landmark framework agreement for enhanced partnership in peace and security envisaging coordinated engagement and joint processes throughout the cycle of conflict.

Today’s briefing session marks one year since the signing of the agreement and offers an opportunity for reviewing the progress made thus far. At the time of the signing of the agreement in April 2017, Secretary-General Guterres observed that ‘we are witnessing, in Africa, as around the world, changes …that force us to have a strategic review of the way peace support operations take place’. Both Chergui and Lacroix would inform the PSC that the joint field visit constitutes a practical manifestation of the efforts to translate the vision of elevating the partnership between the AU and the UN to a strategic level through joint strategic engagement on the ground.

In today’s session, Lacroix is expected to highlight UN’s expectation to move away from peace support operations seeking to implement wide range of tasks (with an extended presence on the ground and limited effectiveness) to operations with limited set of tasks aimed at enabling the building of national institutions and transfer responsibility to national authorities within shortest time possible.
The briefing would also highlight the importance of the search for political solutions and the value of joint strategic level engagement through joint filed visits. It is to be recalled that 2320 also envisaged UN-AU partnership ‘based on respective comparative advantage, burden sharing, consultative decision making, joint analysis and planning missions and assessment visits by the UN and AU, monitoring and evaluation, transparency and accountability.’

In translating joint approaches envisaged in this resolution and in the framework, this joint field visit is an experiment that can be developed into one tool for implementing joint approaches. It helps in achieving joint understanding of the situation on the ground. Additionally, it serves as leverage for supporting the search for political solution in the conflict-affected countries by sending a message of unity of views. Indeed, Chergui and Lacroix sought to achieve that in the CAR, thereby contributing to calming down the tense situation arising from recent incidents relating to the CAR and MINUSCA operation. In their joint statement, they underscored the ‘complete unity and common resolve of the African Union and the United Nations’.
In terms of AU-UN partnership, today’s PSC session will be informed by the long list of recommendations made by the 2015 High-Level Independent Panel on Peace Operations (HIPPO), which highlighted, among others, the need for a more responsive collaborative arrangement and partnership between UN and regional organizations, particularly the UN. Additionally, in its Resolution 2320 of 18 November 2016, the UN Security Council welcomed the AU Assembly decision in July 2016 to finance 25 per cent of the cost of AU-led peace support operations by 2020 with the understanding that the UN would cover the remaining from assessed contributions. From the side of AU PSC members, they may also recall PSC’s its communiqué of 30 May 2016 that underscored the importance of securing a substantive Security Council resolution establishing that UN assessed contributions should, on a case by case basis, finance Security Council-mandated AU peace support missions and seek update in this respect.

Next week on 18 April, Chergui and Lacroix are also expected to brief the UNSC jointly, Chergui via VCT from Addis Ababa and Lacroix in person in New York. With the field visit leading to joint briefing of both the UNSC and the PSC, it can also evolve into useful vehicle for coordinating the agenda and monthly program of work of the two Councils as well.

It is anticipated that after an analysis and review of this joint field visit, the two may explore modalities for effective institutionalization of such visit. The follow up to the visits would also explore in what ways such tools would best be implemented for leveraging the role of peace support operations and the search for the political resolution of conflicts.

While no particular outcome is expected, depending on the joint briefing and the ensuing deliberations, the PSC may both express support for such joint high-level field visit and call for its institutionalization.