Toespraak van minister Koenders bij het International Peace Institute

Toespraak | 20-01-2015

Thank you very much, I’m very glad to be back here again, thank you very much for inviting us. I’m always glad to be at IPI, it’s a place where we can talk about important issues. I’ve always been honored and very pleased to be here. Not just because this a perfect location - just across the street of the United Nations Headquarters - but also because I it’s a place for real debate, for free flow of questions and answers, for listening to what you feel is currently very important in the United Nations. It can help all of us to find the right policies, and to bring our opinions to the floor across the street.

I think that this place where we are today is more important than ever. First of all we have - more than ever - an obligation to speak to one another. Diplomacy is more important than ever. There are many issues in the world right now in which it is difficult to get to an agreement. In which we speak different languages. Diplomacy is very fierce and therefore I think there is an enormous opportunity here in IPI, to help us in the United Nations to come to an agreement.

As a former head of two peacekeeping operations and as a former development minister I feel that the United Nations is the headquarters of our common destiny. I’m glad to be back now as minister of Foreign Affairs for my own country. I hope we can and will be an effective ally in support of a reformed, modern and up to date United Nations. A place where people can connect that want to make a difference.

Allow me to draw a little bit more on this last point. Let me take you further uptown, to the Colombia University where the acclaimed modern and intellectual historian Mark Mazower is a professor. I guess some of you and especially those who follow the United Nations know his book ‘Governing the world, the history of an idea’, published in the autumn of 2012. It traces the origins of the idea of a well governed world.

Now Professor Mazower, and that is correct I think, doesn’t spare the United Nations nor should he. Like any other organization the United Nations can benefit from criticism. But his conclusion has a gloomy cast to it. Although realism and idealism have always been present in international affairs, Mazower laments the current state of international politics. He fears that the inherently idealistic goal of a well-governed world is being lost. I do not share his pessimism, although there is reason to worry, I think, we all realize that. There is reason to worry when I think about the important year of 2014, about lack of unity in the Security Council to solve large crises in the world, from Eastern Ukraine to Syria.  Fierce language is needed; I mentioned it already, when it comes to issues of interpretation of human rights, of freedom of religion, of freedom of speech.

And that is why diplomacy is so important and why I think it has a new purpose: it is not the old fashioned trade of being diplomats. It is more than ever about being the bridge between cultures, between countries to help govern the world.

So maybe there is some reason for some pessimism, but I think the book also has an uplifting quality. As a pragmatic idealist I take from it the thought that sheer collective will power is sometimes all it takes to change the world for the better and this book gives very good examples of that.

Let’s take a look at the present. The year 2014 was a difficult one for the world community. We faced many unexpected crises. We witnessed the highest number of refugees and IDPs in history. There were more Level 3 emergencies, the most extreme crises, than ever before. With the MH17 tragedy, the Kingdom of the Netherlands experienced in a very direct way how intertwined today’s global crises are. Foreign affairs became terribly personal for many of my compatriots as we lost almost 200 citizens, but also for many families around the world. We are still working hard with all those involved to facilitate the investigations, with the aim of holding those who are responsible  accountable.  This also created awareness that crises can touch individual citizens even far away. I think in itself that is a positive development, I think here at the United Nations we are always careful that we’re not seen as some cosmopolitan elite that forgets the interests of the citizens of the world. And some of the citizens of the world are living in their own countries and have become more and more provincial. They want to defend themselves against the risks of the rest of the world. We have to be the bridge makers, the Foreign Ministers, the diplomats, those that make the bridge between local and international, that’s our task.

Yet the year 2014 also showed how important the UN can be. The Secretary-General responded firmly to the Ebola crisis by establishing UNMEER. And I think that was a crucial step, made in conjunction with the region of West Africa and with some key countries. I think that’s the way to work. There has to be an ‘orchestra’ of the United Nations and member states. Not as one on top of the other but in close connection with each other. And my colleagues, the Minister of Defence and the Minister for Development Cooperation in my own government, went to visit the UNMEER mission last week. Our navy vessel Karel Doorman has been transporting vital supplies from the international community.
And our joint fight against Ebola is showing results. Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone reported their lowest weekly total of new confirmed Ebola cases in months. Yet it is important to note that the Ebola crisis is not over yet. We should follow developments closely and continue as an international community to step up our response to this crisis. And I was happy to see that Mali - the country where I worked till recently - has just been able to report that she has no new cases.

Even after the immediate crisis, we need to support these states in the fragile phase of recovery. Above all, we should isolate the disease and not the countries, to try to limit the negative economic and social consequences of the Ebola outbreak.

I mentioned the Ebola outbreak as a way where the United Nations was very vital, was very key in an orchestra with different countries. But we all realize that this terrible disease could not have spread without the enormous public health crisis in West Africa. So we have to learn from that as well. Those who have worked for many years in West Africa have to realize that in the end many of their policies were not successful. It could not have been spreading as fast as it did if there hadn’t been a crisis of public health already in West Africa. And we also realize that the WHO was crucial in this crisis and we understand more than ever that we need the WHO, its innovation and its reconstruction.

Therefore I think it’s important that when we talk about 2014, we see the enormous possibility and also the strength of the United Nations, but also look at the needs that are so apparent, I don’t have to mention them here, that we are discussing them every day. We are looking at humanitarian cooperation; we are also organizing in the context of our country with others a humanitarian summit. Not a summit just to talk again, but to think through, when we see the underfunding of appeals around the world, how we can ensure that there is more predictability in humanitarian finance, how we can look at the relationship between humanitarian recovery and early recovery and how we can act more preventatively. This is not a new agenda, but it stretches from the importance that we have seen after the Ebola crisis.

There were other issues in 2014, where there was much to admire about the United Nations. There was my colleague Hilde Johnson in Sudan opening up the camps of the United Nations Mission. It was a courageous step to take in her peacekeeping mission, which created a safe haven for thousands of innocent civilians in South Sudan. The joint OPCW/UN mission led by Sigrid Kaag, my capable former colleague at the UN, successfully completed the elimination of Syria’s declared chemical weapons programme.

But the international community’s job is not over yet and I think we have to realize that there are shortcomings. The Security Council has been paralysed in responding to the atrocities in Syria. Over the Christmas holidays, I was in touch with courageous people in Aleppo. We did it basically via the Internet, talking to the people who were in Aleppo. I think the world still has not realised sufficiently the enormous suffering that is taking place. We will talk about it maybe a little bit later, but I think Aleppo could be the icon of a place which we cannot fail. The humanitarian community cannot fail, but also those who look for political strategies to solve their problem.

Secondly, while we have made great progress on the MDGs – and I say this in the face of all the sceptics – 800 million people still suffer from hunger. Even if the MDGs are reached, substantial poverty will remain in LDCs and conflict-affected countries.

Despite resolution 1325, women are still not involved in many peace processes. IPI says that women constitute only 9% of peace negotiators. When I was negotiating in Algiers for peace in Mali, no women were present at the table. I will explain a little bit about that: in fact the women were present but more at a distance. If you look to the Tuareg women,  as some of my African colleagues here know  men are actually the boss when it comes to Tuaregs, so they sent the men to the peace negotiations and then they would go back to get a yes or a no, also from the women. So it doesn’t always say that when women are not there, it doesn’t work. But obviously it is important that we continue to talk about 1325. We will talk about it this afternoon in a special event, because in practice often they are absent and we have to think through why that  is the case.

In 2015, the United Nations is turning 70. But even at 70, the UN still has a lot of growing up to do. This is not the world of 1945. A new legitimacy is needed. And this is a world where the trend towards fewer conflicts has come to a halt.  Armed conflict is now world leaders’ biggest fear, according to the World Economic Forum’s recent report Global Risks 2014. I have seen many people go to Davos this week. That will be the issue: security, hybrid warfare, new risks, and insecurity. That is at the top of the agenda internationally right now and it goes beyond the economy at this point, if you look to the concerns of many people and many leaders. And the UN and its member states need to be prepared for a world in greater turmoil. As Jean-Marie Guéhenno, president of the International Crisis Group and a former UN official, recently wrote: ‘Stabilising the world’s most vulnerable areas should be a major, global foreign policy imperative — and not just a moral one, given that these regions often serve as a haven for terrorists and transnational criminals.’

Some people here have referred to the tragic events in Paris. It is true that the UN plays a key role in addressing the phenomenon. We need it every day. I was in Brussels yesterday talking with the other EU Ministers of Foreign Affairs about how to combat terrorism and extremism. And I think the UN plays a key role and also a legal role: countering the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters, and stopping the flow of financial resources are the crucial elements to fight this problem. But the UN should also look at the root causes of terrorism. It should help shape a narrative that provides an alternative to radicalisation, based on human rights, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and all the other universal values that humanity shares. An alternative narrative that also makes room for an understanding of local realities as well as diplomacy and dialogue, not force alone, are the factors that can eventually lay conflicts to rest. It is time for an intensive dialogue that leaves no room for arrogance, double standards or propaganda.

Let the UN today do once again what we founded it for: provide a platform that promotes dialogue. Not just between civilisations, but also within these civilisations, to address the root causes of terrorism. We need to formulate a response to the many challenges we faced in 2014. I mentioned them, Ebola, but also the structural causes behind it, the issue of strengthening peacekeeping operations in a time of hybrid warfare. And certainly this issue of preventative diplomacy combined with talking in the UN on counter narratives. In this speech I would like to highlight four areas where we member states can all help the UN become more effective:

• ending poverty;
• supporting peace and protecting civilians;
• advancing women’s rights;
• reforming the Security Council and supporting the Secretary-General’s reform efforts.

These are old themes but they have to be carried out in a new way. The world has changed, that means it’s not only the goals that have to be adapted to a new world. The way we function, the way we organize ourselves needs to change as well, adapting them to the realities of the 21st Century.

Let me start by ending poverty, respecting the planet and meeting special needs.

In September we need to agree ambitious and well-thought-out sustainable development goals that will help end poverty by 2030. The UN has managed to galvanise unprecedented support for the MDG agenda. The critics were out there and we see that they were wrong. For the first time, everyone agreed on the road to ending poverty. Can lightning strike twice? Can we make the Road to Dignity that the Secretary-General has laid out become a reality? I believe we can.

Ending poverty is the most important goal on this agenda. Over a billion people are still poor, so in that sense the MDG’s have a long road to go. Freeing them from poverty requires tackling inequality and protecting human rights. We need inclusive growth. Jobless growth is a big risk in many countries where young people’s potential is not taken seriously. When I worked in Mali and we talked about terrorism and insecurity we knew it is directly related to joblessness, to jobless growth. Many people felt they had no future. And it is not only in West Africa, it is like that in many regions in the world. When we talk about MDG’s we have to relate them to economic policies of ending poverty and promoting inclusive growth. We also need to emphasize the universal character of the agenda. I think we are now going in the right direction, and we should continue to go in that direction and continue to make sure that the funding is in place. We can have a lot of nice goals, but if there is no financing, forget it. So [the upcoming] Financing for Development conference is key. Like in Monterrey we have to think through how this can be a success in a completely different world economy, but its question remains the same: where are the real flows in terms of investment, in terms of credits, etcetera, etcetera.

The needs of least developed countries, of African countries, of small island developing states and conflict-affected countries should be prioritised. I will be at the African Union Summit myself next week to discuss the African Union’s ideas for the post-2015 agenda, as formulated in the Common African Position. We are happy to be a partner, as The Netherlands, for countries around the world in finding sustainable and innovative solutions for these issues, including water and climate. Our Kingdom is surrounded by water on almost all sides. The Netherlands is a delta country, with more than half of its population living below the sea level. Aruba, Curaçao and St Maarten are Small Island Developing States. For the Kingdom of the Netherlands, water is both an asset and a challenge. The Netherlands, Aruba, Curaçao and St Maarten are all threatened by climate change and rising sea levels. Therefore it is important to become successful at the end of the year. We have to do it very effectively, with new ways of negotiating, looking at where the interests of the different countries lie. And I already see developments there in the discussion that are positive; it is not only the deal between the US and China, it is also the latest climate summit in Lima that gave us some ideas how we can advance the discussion. But we are not there yet and I think we also have to think through how we can adapt our innovation, our businesses and our public partnerships relating to climate and agriculture and other areas.

And what we need - next to the development issue and a modern approach to Development Cooperation - I think,  is strengthening of the development institutions and reform of the development institutions of the UN, supporting Ban Ki-moon in his agenda in Paris and on the Millennium Development Goals.

Second: supporting peace, protecting civilians. We were talking about a new kind of conflict, hybrid warfare where groups not only have territorial aims - like Daesh. But also use guerrilla or terrorist tactics, use classical warfare tactics and increasingly use communication technologies through social media. Extremely effective. Do we really have an answer to this conflict, in our peacekeeping operations, in our preventative efforts, in the way we deal with this?

I think not and I cannot blame anybody for it, because it is extremely complex. But I think we need again as UN to prioritize conflict affected areas. That’s why the Netherlands supports the work of UNDPA. We also need to improve the effectiveness of peace operations. Before becoming minister of Foreign Affairs, I worked in two peacekeeping operations in Cote d’Ivoire and Mali. We’ll discuss it more deeply maybe in a discussion later on today. We know that it’s important that we have to review what we are doing. I think the initiative of the Secretary General is extremely timely, a review of peacekeeping operations. We had Brahimi in 2000, so in 2015 we have to take another look: what was the real message of Brahimi and are we still on the right track when it comes to the relationship between mandate and means, between mandate and implementation, between troops contributing countries and what we really need on the ground? It should not only be the countries that are the poorest in the world that supply the troops for these peacekeeping operations. I’m proud that my country is now moving in very strongly in Mali, to make sure that there are the countries of the world to contribute to peacekeeping operations. We have to think through how we can reinvent them. There is a brigade in Congo and I hope they will act very soon with the FDLR in the coming days and weeks.

We have the need for information in peacekeeping operations. A few years ago the word 'intelligence' could not be used in the UN, why not? If you are the head of a UN peacekeeping operation, you don’t know what is happening, how can you effectively protect civilians? That is impossible! If you want to protect women who go the market, in line with Resolution 1325, you need intelligence and the eyes and ears on the ground! That’s why we have innovated; the UN has innovated peacekeeping in Mali on this. But we’re not there yet. When we talk about the issue of the real political solutions to this type of conflicts, because in the end there is not a military answer alone, we have to build really on one UN, also in the early recovery phase.

I remember coming to Mali, and before that to Côte d’Ivoire; there are some very good experts here that know this, who have worked on preventative diplomacy. When you go to the north, where the biggest problem is: there was a complete absence of NGO’s, of UN agencies. That is I think the second element of reform that is crucial. On poverty and innovation, secondly on the issue of peacekeeping and protection of civilians.

The third one I wanted to mention, very quickly, is the issue of supporting women’s rights. Also there of course, this is not a new discussion. We had big conferences with enormous amounts of positive output, we should not underestimate the role of the UN in norm setting, in setting discussions in the world on women’s rights, on gender, on human rights and so on, even if they are culturally sensitive and each country will have to find out their own ways of doing it, it’s not something that should be pushed from above, like different cultural interpretations to universal rights.

When we come to women’s rights I think there is still a lot of work to do and the UN must keep the promises we’ve made to women worldwide, I already spoke about the key role women play in development and the potential being left untapped. I’m very proud of my own Queen, Her Majesty Queen Máxima, who as the Secretary-General’s special advocate for inclusive finance for development is working to make sure that women in particular have access to financial services. I mentioned the issue of 1325; let that not be a ritual. 1325 is not a piece of paper: it is about participation actively.

We see that many women are resilient in the face of conflict and oppression. The Guardian recently reported on women in Timbuktu, in Mali, who reclaimed their space after the Islamists had left. Mint Mohamed, a female member of parliament, is quoted as saying, 'Timbuktu is lucky, because of its name, its cultural heritage, saints and women. Timbuktu was founded by a woman. Today the UN force in Timbuktu is led by a woman. We have had many great women – and that is why Timbuktu has women in authority today.' These women and their stories can inspire us to continue converting 1325 into real action – and men and women should work on this together.

Then my fourth point: Reform for an effective UN:

Those who have worked in the UN and have been active there for many years are always talking about reform of the UN. There’s nothing wrong with that because we always have to reform because the world is changing quickly. We have new power structures in the world, rising powers, declining powers, we have new actors, we have hybrid warfare, we have very positive developments as well in terms of reducing poverty, in universalizing at least the legitimacy of human rights. But it’s a world that everybody feels, is also full of insecurity. And therefore, the traditional way we look at the UN as the world government talk town that is going to organize all problems of global governance, is not going to be the answer. I think nobody will be able to write that down on a beautiful piece of paper, carved in stone. I think that would be even counterproductive, because we need speed, we need flexibility and we need diplomacy. And a real discussion between countries and how we deal with global issues as the ones I just mentioned.

I think we should not forget, and I’m sure the people here don’t do that, that the UN is a beacon of hope for so many in the world because of its role in defending justice. The protests outside on Dag Hammarskjöld Plaza may not always be pleasant, but they are a sign of how important the UN is in so many people’s eyes. That is why those responsible for the crimes committed in Syria must be held accountable. That is why we need peace in the Middle East. That is why the Netherlands, as a major donor to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, believes that more resources from the regular UN budget should go to human rights. In the Netherlands, we are bound by our constitution to strengthen the international legal order. This is why we are very happy to host the International Court of Justice and other international legal institutions in The Hague.

And we need to make tangible progress towards Security Council reform; I think that is always the elephant in the room. Let’s be open about that. We urgently need a more effective and legitimate Security Council that reflects today’s realities. I was working before in the IMF and the World Bank as Minister of Development for The Netherlands. Over there changes in the power structure of these institutions came about automatically, because of the realities of financial markets. The institutions could not be effective without change, change in representing those who were not represented. I think that obviously should also happen in the Security Council. We have talked about it for many years now. And I think there are possibilities to move forward, in a way leading maybe in the medium term to adaption along lines that are necessary.

The Council needs to address conflicts that cannot be ignored. In conflicts in places like Syria and Ukraine, and in combating terrorism, the Council should make a difference. If we want to get better at building peace, the Security Council has to change. While it has taken some steps towards more open debates and sessions - and I want to applaud my Luxemburg colleague, who has been so forceful, creating humanitarian actions in Syria, helping me when I was representative in Mali - this Council is key for all peace operations, for everybody who is there. And therefore it needs to be strengthened and yes, it needs to be reformed. We are not necessarily in favour of veto rights for new Security Council members. In fact, we support the French initiative to restrict the use of the veto in the Security Council for mass atrocities. We also support the UNSG’s vision for the UN in 2015, which he set out earlier this year. After all, the man is my former boss! I welcome his pleas for tolerance in the face of the threats, his initiative to put human rights up front, and his championing of LGBT rights. 

At the same time, we need a UN that is united and fit for purpose. As I said earlier: at 70, the UN needs to grow up. I have seen first-hand how far we still have to go. More leadership and greater efforts are urgently needed to make One UN a reality. We are not having the impact we should because our efforts are too compartmentalised. As a result we miss opportunities to bring peacekeeping missions to a rapid and successful end. You always need an exit strategy.

In conclusion: the Kingdom of the Netherlands lies partly in Europe and partly in the Caribbean. Our transatlantic location links two continents and several groups of countries. We are a gateway to both Europe and Latin America, and we appreciate the challenges faced by Small Island Developing States, especially when we move up to the [United Nations Climate Change Conference in] Paris later this year.

Our unique location gives us a keen eye for opportunities. Let me return for a moment to Professor Mazower of the Columbia University. His book Governing the World is quite pessimistic, at times even cynical. And if we look at today’s world, it is sometimes hard not to be depressed. The challenges that the world community faces are enormous. Last year we saw some appalling atrocities, as I have already mentioned. This year started off terribly, with the brutal massacre of over 2000 people by Boko Haram in Nigeria and a monstrous terrorist attack in Paris. But if we think like pessimists, we risk acting like pessimists. As I said at the beginning, the UN is the headquarters for all those who want a better world, for all of us who want to be realistic optimists. Like the crowds everywhere who marched for freedom of expression after the tragedy in Paris and who came from all over the world.

The Netherlands strongly believes in its partnership with the UN for peace, justice and development. This is why we are a candidate for the Security Council for the 2017-2018 term. We are a contributor to UN peacekeeping. We are the host country for international institutions that help sustain the international legal order. We are a major donor of development and humanitarian aid and one of the top 10 contributors to the UN. So we are ready to serve on the Security Council, ready to join in working for peace, justice and development, in partnership with you.

Thank you very much!