Summary: Continuing with this series of reports, the 2011 Cross-Cutting Report on Children and Armed Conflict now provides data on and analysis of trends in 2010.
Summary and conclusions of the report
2010 was a year of consolidation and implementation of earlier Council decisions on children and armed conflict. 2009 had been a high-profile year for this issue with the Council adopting a presidential statement and a resolution that expanded the scope for inclusion in the Secretary-General’s reports for parties to conflict that commit violations against children. There had been intense activity around the adoption of resolution 1882 on 4 August 2009 which opened up the criteria for listing of the parties in the annexes to the Secretary-General’s report to include killing and maiming and rape and sexual violence against children. By contrast, in 2010 there was little appetite for another resolution or a further expansion of the criteria for listing. Rather, the Council appeared content to leave its Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict space for implementation and the Working Group became the main driver on the issue during the year.
This is Security Council Report’s fourth Cross-Cutting Report on Children and Armed Conflict. The first report in 2008 examined relevant data from 2003 to 2007 in resolutions, presidential statements, Council missions, Secretary-General’s reports, peace agreements and peacekeeping mandates and tried to assess the degree to which the thematic issue of children and armed conflict had been addressed and reflected in the mainstream of the Council’s overall work on country-specific situations. That report also examined the impact of the 2005 adoption of resolution 1612, which set up a monitoring and reporting mechanism and established the Security Council Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict.
Our 2008 report also provided a baseline for the second and third reports published in April 2009 and June 2010. These two reports built on the historical background of the issue and analysed data for 2008 and 2009. They also highlighted key trends and options for the Council and the Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict over those years.
Continuing with this series of reports, the 2011 Cross-Cutting Report on Children and Armed Conflict now provides data on and analysis of trends in 2010.
Among the main findings are:
-
Incorporating children and armed conflict issues into the country-specific work of the Council continued the upward trend in 2010. There was an increase in the number and quality of substantive references to children in resolutions as well as in Secretary-General’s reports. However, presidential statements remained at the same level. The most substantial references to child protection tend to arise from situations that are or have been on the Secretary-General’s annexes.
-
The conclusions of the Working Group are still not being consistently addressed in resolutions, presidential statements or Secretary-General’s reports as a standard practice. In fact, in some situations the references seem to be consciously omitted. This appeared to be the case with Afghanistan.
-
There is an increase in the number of Secretary-General’s reports containing child protection sections. But the substance of these sections tends to focus only on recruitment of children. Information on sexual violence and killing and maiming is less common. This may change with further development of the monitoring and reporting structures for killing and maiming and sexual violence.
-
There are notably better linkages between the Council’s children and armed conflict agenda and its sanctions committees following resolution 1882 of August 2009 and the 2010 presidential statement which called for improved communications between the Working Group, the Special Representative for children and armed conflict and the sanctions committees.
-
There are indications that the Council is more aware of the need for child protection to continue into post-conflict situations. The Council’s focus on the overlap between conflict prevention, peacekeeping and peacebuilding may have led to a greater understanding of the continuing needs of children adversely affected during conflict as well as the need to include children’s needs in any conflict prevention strategy.
-
In its resolutions on children, the Council has begun to pay more attention to the need to protect women and girls. While sexual violence is a key issue in the protection of children, the Council tends to see this issue through the “women” lens which may over time result in the specific needs of children affected by sexual violence being side-lined.
-
The focus in 2010 on the issue of women, peace and security and sexual violence may have contributed to the decision that the issue of children and armed conflict should be less of a priority in the Council’s work programme.
-
Progress has continued in the release of child soldiers and commitment to action plans from groups involved in using children in armed conflict. (These time-bound action plans were asked for in resolutions 1539 (2004) and 1612 (2005) and they are generally seen as the first step towards getting off the Secretary-General’s list of shame.) However, there is little evidence that groups have responded to the two new triggers— sexual violence and killing and maiming—by signing action plans.
-
While there has been some success getting governments to sign action plans to release children and stop violations, there has been very little impact on certain non-state actors, particularly groups like the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) and Al-Shabaab where no contact has been possible.
-
The role of the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict has grown over the last four years with her field missions now serving multiple purposes, including dis-semination of the Working Group’s recommendations.
Observations on the Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict:
-
The Working Group showed renewed innovation in its working methods in 2010. For the first time, members of the Working Group went on a visit to a situation on its work agenda and reacted to violations against children in real time, through a press statement. It also recommended a regional strategy for monitoring and reporting on the LRA.
-
However, the Working Group continues to be hesitant about stronger recommendations such as targeted sanctions and specific time-lines that might put pressure on persistent perpetrators.
-
While there were some difficult moments in various negotiations during the year, overall political sensitivities do not seem to have obstructed the work of the Working Group as much as in 2008 and 2009.
-
The Working Group struggled to close the time gap between the date of publication of the Secretary-General’s reports on children and armed conflict in country-specific situations and the date of adoption of its Conclusions.
-
The rotation of the chair of the Working Group every two years to an elected member appears to have evolved into a practice and the Working Group seems to have matured to a point where changes such as the rotation of the chairman and members do not appear to fundamentally affect its ability to function.
-
There are some signs that the Working Group is becoming entrenched in its ways and possibly risks losing some of its previous flexibility and adaptability. The formal meetings tend to follow a relatively rigid format which may not always encourage members’ active participation. The informal meetings, however, continue to be effective and allow for greater interaction and discussion.
-
With the development of the Working Group into a mature subsidiary body and given its workload, a more long-term solution for administrative and substantive support may need to be found.
-
If the Working Group is to continue using field missions as a means of pressuring parties on the Secretary-General’s annexes, it will need to work out a regular means of financing for these trips. Self-funding has meant that very few members have been able to go on the trips.
-
A growing problem is the logistics of holding both the informal and formal meetings. The shortage of space and translators have sometimes made it difficult to keep to the schedule for adoption of conclusions.
Some of the findings from the case studies include:
-
Commitment from the government in addressing the issue of violations against children, as seen in the case study on Afghanistan, can provide the impetus needed to begin seriously addressing this issue. On the other hand, when recommendations of sanctions are made and there is no speedy imposition (coupled with poor government capacity and lack of will), as is the case in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the impact in terms of changing the situation of affected children can be negligible.
-
The current process of adding violations against children as a reason for imposing targeted sanctions and then designating individuals or entities is a long and cumbersome one. Although the Council first expressed its intention to impose such sanctions in its 2004 resolution on children and armed conflict, it took another two years before it took up this recommendation in its resolution on the DRC. (This resolution [S/RES/1698] extended sanctions to political and military leaders recruiting or using children and targeting children in situations of armed conflict.) The gap between the Working Group on Children and Armed Conflict recommending sanctions and an individual being designated by the DRC Sanctions Committee was almost three years. There is a need for more rapid progression from the initiation to the practical implementation when sanctions are suggested as a tool.
pdf: http://www.securitycouncilreport.org/site/c.glKWLeMTIsG/b.7539609/k.E832...
