Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Annual Report from the European Commission on the instrument for stability in 2007 – Executive summary {COM(2008) 181 final}
Date: 2008-04-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: cooperation policy, development aid, foreign policy, impact study, international security, report













EUR-Lex - 52008SC0446 - EN






Important legal notice




|



52008SC0446

Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Annual Report from the European Commission on the instrument for stability in 2007 – Executive summary {COM(2008) 181 final}  /* SEC/2008/0446 final */  








[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 11.4.2008SEC(2008) 446COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENTAccompanying document to the REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Annual report from the European Commission on the Instrument for Stability in 2007 – Executive Summary {COM(2008) 181 final}FOREWORDThis report is submitted to the European Parliament and the Council in compliance with the reporting requirement set out in Article 23 of Regulation (EC) N°1717/2006 of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 November 2006 establishing an Instrument for Stability (the IfS Regulation). This article states:‘The Commission shall examine progress achieved in implementing the measures undertaken pursuant to this Regulation and shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council an annual report on the implementation of the assistance. The report shall also be addressed to the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. The report shall contain information relating to the previous year on the measures financed and information on the results of monitoring and evaluation exercises and the implementation of budget commitments and payments, broken down by country, region and cooperation sector’.This report is also submitted in complement to the information already provided in accordance with the reporting requirement of Article 6(6) of the IfS Regulation, which states:‘At as early a stage as possible, following the adoption of Exceptional Assistance Measures, and in any case within seven months of doing so, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council by giving an overview of the existing and planned Community response, including the contribution to be made from other Community financing instruments, the status of existing Country and Multi-Country Strategy Papers, and the Community’s role within the broader international and multilateral response. This report shall also indicate whether and, if so, for how long the Commission intends to continue the Exceptional Assistance Measures’.The current practice established by the Commission during 2007 is to systematically inform the European Parliament and the Council of Exceptional Assistance Measures about to be supported under the IfS as part of the EU’s crisis response. In view of the need to keep the reporting requirements on each individual programme manageable, it is proposed to use this and the future annual reports for a global implementation update on all on-going measures earlier described, including those aspects on which information could not be provided upstream of the start of implementation.I. BACKGROUND TO THE INSTRUMENT FOR STABILITYEC external instruments have for a number of years been providing the Commission’s contribution to the Union’s overall crisis responses , be it in response to natural disasters or to political crises in third countries, in the latter case often alongside EU Joint Actions under Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) or European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). Between 2000 and 2006, this role was notably played by the EC Rapid Reaction Mechanism (RRM) as regards non-humanitarian crisis responses. Despite modest financial envelopes (in the order of €30 million per year) and a tight limit on the duration of programmes (maximum six months), RRM-funded projects played an important role in a number of crisis response undertakings by the EU, in many cases kick-starting programmes under geographic instruments or dovetailing with CFSP/ESDP actions. The RRM was used successfully for example following the crisis in Afghanistan, in response to the tsunami and for the Aceh Peace Process, for the EU Border Assistance Mission to the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine, and in response to a series of other crises in Africa, Latin America, the Western Balkans and the Middle East.The launch of the Instrument for Stability (IfS) in 2007 enhanced considerably the Commission’s crisis response capacity, since the crisis response component constitutes the biggest part of this new instrument (more than one and a half billion euros out of the total of just over two billion over seven years)[1]. Compared to the RRM, the crisis response component of the IfS represents a considerable increase in financial allocations (€93 million in 2007, and an average of €230 million per year for crisis responses during the period 2007-2013) and in the duration of programmes (18 months, with the possibility of extension under certain conditions). Section II of this report presents the measures adopted under Article 3 of the IfS Regulation, namely ‘assistance in response to situations of crisis or emerging crisis’. The ‘crisis response’ component of the IfS is under direct responsibility of Directorate A of Directorate General for External Relations (DG RELEX) of the European Commission, with an increased involvement of EC Delegations in third countries at the implementation stage.The IfS also contains a longer term component, providing for ‘ assistance in the context of stable conditions for cooperation’ . Programmable measures under the IfS include:1. Measures addressing longer-term trans-regional security threats under Articles 4(1) and 4(2) of the IfS Regulation . In the Instrument for Stability Strategy Paper 2007-2013, the Commission has identified the priorities for longer-term actions under Article 4(1) and Article 4(2). First, to support international efforts to address the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, through actions aiming at improving effective control of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear materials and agents, control of dual-use goods, and the redirection of weapons scientists’ knowledge towards peaceful activities. (€53 million for 2007-08). Second, to support global and trans-regional efforts to address the threats posed by trafficking, terrorism and organised crime (€19 million for 2007-08). The long-term component of the IfS repeals some previously-existing budget lines (e.g on drugs).Two additional priorities under Article 4(1) are threats to critical infrastructure and major public health threats with a potential trans-national dimension. These latter areas are new and will require extensive preparation to design specific programmes. The Commission plans to come back to these two areas in subsequent Indicative Programmes.The Strategy for the years 2007-2011 and the Indicative Programme for the years 2007-2008 under article 4 of the IfS have received a favourable opinion by unanimity from the IfS Committee as well as favourable opinion of the European Parliament, and have been adopted in August 2007. This component is programmed by DG RELEX but managed under direct responsibility of EuropeAid Co-operation Office (DG AIDCO). It is described in Section IV of this report.2. ‘ Pre- and post-crisis capacity building measures’ under Article 4(3) of the IfS Regulation , hereafter referred to as ‘crisis preparedness’. For the period 2007-2008, €15 million were programmed for this component, out of which €7 million for 2007. This component, which is also managed centrally by DG RELEX/A, is described in Section III of this report.II. CRISIS RESPONSES UNDER THE INSTRUMENT FOR STABILITY (ARTICLE 3, BUDGET HEADING 19.06.01)II.1. The IfS as part of the EU’s broader crisis response toolboxIn order for the EU to play an enhanced role as a foreign and security policy actor, it must have an effective capacity to respond to crisis situations in third countries , to assist bringing these countries back on the road of sustainable development. Strengthening the Union’s capacities to respond to the world’s crises means both reinforcing the various instruments at the Union’s disposal (civilian and military crisis management instruments, diplomacy, as well as development aid or trade policy), and ensuring that these instruments can be made to work together as a coherent whole . The IfS constitutes an important addition to Community instruments in response to crisis situations, the other ones being humanitarian assistance[2], civil protection (through the MIC)[3], or other external financial instruments when urgently re-deployed in response to a crisis situation[4]. These Community instruments together with EU Joint Actions under CFSP/ESDP, constitute the essence of the EU’s crisis response capability.Even prior to the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, complementary and closely co-ordinated use of Community and CFSP instruments in response to political crises in third countries has become the rule. Notwithstanding the Treaty obligation to ensure coherence in external action, Europe’s citizens and the outside world expect the Union overall to be able to deliver. No instrument exemplifies this better than the crisis response component of the IfS: while remaining a first-pillar instrument decided upon by the Commission, the practice of close political co-ordination with EU Member States (notably in the Political and Security Committee, but also in the geographic working groups) has made it a politically responsive EC instrument.II.2. Genesis of IfS crisis response programmesBy their very nature, IfS crisis response programmes can not be programmed in advance. They are developed in response to situations of crisis or emerging crisis , when support cannot be provided rapidly enough under other EC financial instruments. Typically, the IfS can be mobilised in the case of a major new political crisis or natural disaster, or a window of opportunity to pre-empt a crisis or an opportunity to advance conflict resolution, or the need to secure the conditions for the delivery of EC assistance. When used in response to political crises, IfS measures have in a number of cases been crafted and deployed alongside CFSP / ESDP actions.There can be no automaticity in mobilising the IfS in response to any given crisis situation. A judgement is made case by case of which ‘crisis or emerging crisis’ in a third country justifies recourse to this instrument. There are cases of long-standing crises whose protracted status by nature would not justify funding new initiatives under the IfS, and where EC geographic instruments are adequate. In the same way, there are situations where the potential for an emerging crisis is sufficient to justify the use of the instrument.While it is for the Commission’s Directorate-General for External Relations to propose new crisis response measures under the IfS, and the Commission’s exclusive competence to decide and implement IfS programmes, ideas for new IfS programmes are often developed, in a flexible manner, through discussions with a series of actors within the EU (other Directorates-General and services of the Commission, Delegations, but also the Council or individual EU Member States, European Parliament…), or within the wider international community (beneficiary country authorities, UN system agencies, bilaterals), or with civil society actors. Draft programme components are identified on the basis of the assessment of needs and of key issues to be addressed in a given crisis situation. Projects are at times designed from the outset by Commission staff, while in other cases, advanced project proposals are received from NGOs or international organisations. Beyond the initial screening of proposals for legal eligibility and practical feasibility, additional identification work and negotiations with implementing partners are usually necessary.IfS approval procedures are designed to ensure rapid adoption of programmes , while also allowing for the necessary upstream consultation and co-ordination. Unlike EC humanitarian interventions deployable within days or weeks, the lead time for deploying IfS programmes – from the initial needs assessment to the financing of the first actions on the ground – is in general in the order of two to three months. This is understandable: while ECHO actions are apolitical and allow urgent deployment, IfS actions are very political, and can just not be deployed lightly, and without proper consultation within the EU, the country authorities, and with other international actors.II.3. IfS crisis response programmes adopted in the course of 2007The crisis response component of the Stability Instrument represents the bulk of the budget (€91 million in 2007)[5]. This allocation was almost entirely used in 2007 : consumption of commitment appropriations reached 99% of the available total, while consumption of payment appropriations reached 68% of the available total[6] (see details in annex). While full use of available budget appropriations is not a priori an essential aim for an instrument of this nature, the high consumption rate of commitment appropriations demonstrates that more could have been spent. Thus, a number of already developed programmes had to be deferred for adoption in early 2008. This demonstrates the appropriateness of the foreseen increases on this budget article during the financial perspectives.The measures adopted in the course of 2007 vary both geographically and thematically : the reader is referred to the annexes for a tabular overview. A number of programmes adopted in the course of 2007 have already started delivering concrete results.Thematically , the measures supported cover a broad range of issues, targeted on the specific needs of each conflict/post-conflict situation: short-term advice to develop and kick-start post-conflict security system reform (DRC, Guinea Bissau, Lebanon), complementary measures in areas where ESDP missions are deployed (e.g. DRC, Afghanistan, Chad), support to regional peace-building capacity (AU – AMISOM Somalia, AU-UN Mediation in Darfur), Rule of Law and transitional justice (Afghanistan, Colombia, Haiti), support to interim administrations (ICO Kosovo), conflict resolution and reconciliation (Uganda, Zimbabwe, Burma/Myanmar, Southern Thailand), post-conflict needs assessments and rehabilitation (Lebanon refugee camp), support to displaced populations (Lebanon, Syria), and conflict resources (Kimberley Process through dedicated facility). No major disaster response programmes were funded in the course of 2007 , however the IfS was able to support several post-disaster needs assessments in late 2007 and early 2008, which are likely to materialise in disaster response programmes this year.Geographically , the largest share of funds (some 43% of the total) was allocated for measures in Sub-Saharan Africa . These include:-  Chad. A programme of €10 million was adopted to help fund over half of the cost of the UN MINURCAT programme of training and deployment of 850 Chadian police forces (‘Police tchadienne pour la protection humanitaire’) in charge of maintaining security in the refugee and IDP camps in eastern Chad. This measure contributes to the joint EU-UN operation, including the ESDP military mission EUFOR to Chad and the Central African Republic. EUFOR aims to ensure a more secure environment in the areas surrounding the refugee and IDP camps in Chad. This mission is crucially complemented by the IfS-funded UN police training, this being another good example of integrated use of the different EU instruments. A further programme of €5 million was adopted for Chad to assist a census and proper voter registration in view of the Parliamentary elections planned for 2009, following the agreement between the government and the opposition in August 2007.-  Darfur. A programme of €3 million was adopted to provide an EC contribution to the UN-administered ‘Trust Fund for the AU-UN Joint Mediation Support Team (JMST) for Darfur’. This Fund was set up to support the joint efforts of the AU and UN to revitalise the peace process in Darfur and, in particular, to provide direct support to the negotiations phase of the peace process and related preparatory measures. Activities supported under the Trust Fund notably include strengthening JMST capacity, facilitating the preparation of parties, consultations with civil society, confidence-building measures and public information actions. Meanwhile, the previous AU peacekeeping force in Darfur (AMIS) received substantial support under the EDF Africa Peace Facility, before handing over in December 2007 to the UNAMID hybrid force, whose peacekeeping efforts in Darfur are complemented by the EU-UN operation in neighbouring eastern Chad. Peace and stabilisation in Darfur would open the way for reconstruction and development programmes under the EDF.-  Somalia . A programme of €5 million was adopted to support the establishment of a (civilian) Planning Unit (PU) for the African Union operation AMISOM in Somalia. The AMISOM PU consists of a core team in Addis Ababa and a liaison office in Nairobi. This programme constitutes an urgent strengthening of AU capacities to enable it to plan, oversee and provide guidance to AMISOM (the latter being also directly supported under the EDF Africa Peace Facility). This support is part of the longer-term EU’s strategic partnership with the AU.-  DR Congo. A programme of €3.2 million was adopted to support the re-integration of former combatants into the ‘mixed brigades’ of the new Congolese army. The programme aims specifically to improve access to health and education, and improve shelter, water and sanitation facilities, for the dependents of the mixed brigades. This programme is part of the overall SSR programme co-ordinated between the Council and Commission, and complements the stabilisation efforts of EUSEC and MONUC, coming on top of already considerable assistance under the EDF. A further €5 million programme in DR Congo supports the establishment of an effective country-wide police service, notably through the introduction of an integrated system of human resources management. Measures supported include technical assistance and investment support, opening the way for further support under the EDF and are designed in synergy with SSR action under EUPOL.-  Uganda. A programme of €4.2 million was adopted to support peace and stability in Northern Uganda, and to address escalating violence in the Karamoja region in the context of disarmament. The programme will support, first, the Juba peace talks between the government and the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), including ceasefire monitoring capacity and awareness-raising of the local population. In addition, the programme will support the disarmament process in the Karamoja region through facilitation of civil-military dialogue, community sensitisation, and alternative livelihoods / reintegration, as well as related cross-border initiatives with South Sudan. These initiatives contribute to the objectives of the Horn of Africa initiative, and pave the way for longer-term assistance under the EDF.-  Guinea-Bissau . €603,000 were committed to deploy Security Sector Reform experts to Guinea-Bissau. The project team notably provides advice on the legal and institutional framework, on instruments for compensation and reintegration of former security personnel or pension schemes, on remaining censuses, and on effective donor co-ordination and reporting. This support prepares the ground for further EDF support, and complements ESDP. SSR and DDR are key reform areas in Guinea Bissau since the new government took office in April 2007.-  Zimbabwe . A programme of €3 million was adopted to support a series of small projects to promote dialogue and democracy in Zimbabwe in the run-up to the 2008 elections. The actions, implemented principally through non-state actors, provide support on electoral matters, support to media and training of journalists, engagement with SADC mediation, review of legislation and of the political framework, etc.In the Middle East , some €19.7 million or 22% of the funds were used on programmes in :-  Lebanon . A programme for €6.8 million provides assistance for the reconstruction of the Nahr el Bared camp, which was almost entirely destroyed in the fighting between Lebanese forces and the Fatah al Islam milita between May and September 2007. The programme aims to facilitate the return and progressive reintegration of 30,000 Palestine refugees displaced by the fighting. The programme will be implemented through UNRWA during 2008, and will provide support for assessments in Nahr el Bared and Beddawi Camps, planning of reconstruction, rubble removal, livelihoods, and direct institutional support to the Lebanese government for the reconstruction.-  A further €2.4 million were committed in Lebanon to support police reform and the German-led border security pilot project. The police reform project provides two senior European experts to assist the Lebanese police with the creation of a Control and Monitoring Committee and co-ordination mechanisms, paving the way for continued ENPI support covering all stages of the criminal justice chain. The border security pilot project is a financial and technical contribution to the pilot project at Lebanon’s Northern border supported by several Member States, including the continued presence of an eight-strong German expert team, and contributions by Denmark and the UK. This border management support aims to build Lebanese capacity to control the border with Syria, and thus to comply with UNSC Resolutions 1559 and 1701.-  Palestine. This programme for €7.5 million finances several actions contributing to Palestinian-Israeli peace negotiations in 2008 in response to the recent Annapolis undertakings . The programme supports international mediation by providing operational and logistical support to the Office of the Quartet Representative Tony Blair, and his staff based in Jerusalem. Further activities to be funded under the programme include building operational capacity of the Palestinian Civil Police in line with the Road Map, notably through equipment provision, in close co-ordination with the ESDP mission EUPOL COPPS.-  Iraqi Refugees in Syria. This programme of €3 million aims to alleviate the burden created on the education sector through the presence in Syria of a massive number of refugees from Iraq. It focuses on the area in and around Damascus which is most affected by the refugee influx. The programme, which started in August 2007 with UNICEF core funding, focuses on ensuring that Syrian schools can absorb Iraqi refugee children by supporting selective rehabilitation of school building, provision of teaching material, equipment and furniture, training of teachers, headmasters and school counsellors, etc. A second part of the programme supports initiatives aiming at the development and the social integration of Iraqi refugee children and adolescents. This measure complements the humanitarian assistance already provided and the programmed or foreseen ENPI or DCI support in related sectors.In the Western Balkans , €10 million were adopted to support the running costs of the International Civilian Office (ICO) in Kosovo . This support was adopted anticipatively under 2007 funds, to enable the EC to be in a position to provide funds as soon as the ICO is established in 2008. The ICO, as the future international civilian administration of Kosovo, is expected to crucially support the fledgling Kosovo institutions in the immediate aftermath of independence. Continued high-level international presence in Kosovo will aim to ensure continued respect for human and minority rights, in view of acting as guarantor of a democratic and multiethnic Kosovo, thereby contributing to a durable stabilisation of the region. As part of the EU Stabilisation and Association Process and with significant support under the EC Instrument for Pre-Accession, the EU is helping all countries of the Western Balkans reach European standards and gradually move closer to the Union.In Latin America and the Caribbean , €9 million (some 10% of the funds) were used on programmes in:-  Colombia . A €5 million programme of victim-oriented assistance measures was adopted in the context of the demobilisation of paramilitary groups under the controversial Justice and Peace Law. Projects started in October 2007 and provide legal assistance to victims, support to victims’ organisations for transitional justice policies, and promotion of truth, justice and integral reparation. The programme comprises three main components, to be implemented by four leading national and international NGOs, and almost twenty partner organisations representing different victims' groups, on sector, ethnic or gender basis. Project preparation was taken forward very carefully, in view of the sensitivity of issues and debates at stake, and the need for a real involvement in the process of all future stakeholders, in particular victims' organisations. Implementing partners include the CCJ (Comisión Colombiana de Juristas), the ICTJ (International Centre for Transitional Justice), PCS-Project Counselling Services, and INTERMON Oxfam. This programme complements the broader EC governance programmes in Colombia.-  Haiti. A programme of €3 million was adopted to further help stabilisation in the Martissant neighbourhood of Port-au-Prince, which was re-conquered by MINUSTAH and the Haitian police only in early 2007. Actions funded aim notably at rehabilitating key infrastructures and public spaces, as well as livelihoods and job creation.-  Bolivia . €1 million was made available to finance an urgent study on legal demand for coca leaf. A credible study of this sort aims to underpin revisions to the legal framework of the government’s anti-drugs policy, as the controversial current legislation was the source of serious upheaval and violent confrontions with coca growers. As part of the study, eight specific surveys or sub-studies will be carried out. This study at the same time underpins the CSP/NIP priority of fight against drugs, and paves the way for sizeable alternative development programmes.Finally, in the Asia-Pacific region , some 6% of the funds were used on IfS programmes in-  Afghanistan. A €2.5 programme was adopted to deploy a team of senior policy advisors to support reform of the justice sector in Afghanistan. Outputs will include an improved system for the appointment of judges and prosecutors, improved conditions of service and pay-scales, or a legal aid system. This complements the €135 million EC contribution to the Law and Order Trust Fund, and the ESDP Rule of Law mission deployed simultaneously in the country.-  Southern Thailand. A financing decision of €3 million aims to support the reconciliation process in Southern Thailand, by providing support to a series of measures by civil society actors engaged in justice reform, or proposing actions towards an informed public debate on the South. The programme will support, from early 2008, related initiatives by a series of international or local NGOs or research centres. This programme may be complemented by related measures under EIDHR, the Thai-EC co-operation facility, or a further programme under the IfS in the course of 2008.-  Burma/Myanmar. Support under the IfS for some €575,000 will cover the cost of enhancing the office of the UN Special Envoy for Burma/Myanmar Ibrahim Gambari with additional professional staff and with external expertise throughout 2008. This support will complement the efforts of the EU Envoy Fassino. In parallel, a second project supported in this context is support for the continuation of informal contacts in B/M and a ‘conflict mapping’ by Crisis Management Initiative (CMI), a Finnish Peace-Building NGO, for some €120,000 . These measures are likely to be complemented in 2008 by a further IfS package and EIDHR measures supporting initiatives of civil society actors on dialogue, democratisation or media. A peaceful return to democratic civilian rule would open the way for the resumption of EC co-operation with the country.In addition to the above-enumerated programmes adopted and measures supported, a series of preparatory measures (e.g. expert assessment missions) were funded in the course of 2007 towards related programmes likely to be proposed under the IfS in the course of 2008. This was the case notably in Fiji (fielding of a European expert to take part in an electoral assessment alongside other donors following the coup ), in the Philippines (EU mission to assess needs related to extra-judicial killings), or in Syria and Jordan (experts currently working on medium-term response strategies to help the country authorities cope with Iraqi refugees).Additionally, some of the above-described measures were not funded under an ad hoc financing decision, but under one of the two thematic facilities allowing to support small-scale measures in the area of policy advice / mediation / urgent technical assistance, or conflict resources (total of €2 million). Under the ‘conflict resources’ facility, a project was launched to support the EC Presidency of the Kimberley Process in 2007. Activities include the organisation of a diamond fingerprinting workshop in October, the monitoring of illicit production through remote sensing, and statistical analysis.Close and regular monitoring of all IfS programmes is ensured by EC Delegations in the beneficiary countries. Delegations are in many cases also directly responsible for the implementation of assistance programmes. In view of the fact that the first IfS programmes have only been on-going for some months, no evaluations were conducted to date .II.4. The first lessons learnt from 2007The first year of operation of the crisis response component of the IfS has been a success . Despite less than optimal resources and structures, the 2007 crisis response budget was entirely committed (see annex). The programmes adopted have contributed to efforts in responding to crises around the world, usefully (and sometimes crucially) complementing other EU crisis response measures.Thematically, several of the programmes supported have benefited from parallel policy and conceptual developments at EC/EU level and notably recent communications / guidelines SSR, DDR, IBM guidelines, fragile states etc.Geographically , it is considered important to tackle crises where they arise, without trying to deliberately balance between regions. For instance, no programmes were funded in 2007 in the NIS region, however sizeable programmes were funded there in the past (EUBAM) and are likely to be funded there in 2008 (Kyrgyz republic justice and constitutional reform). Also, comparatively less was spent on Asia in 2007, but major programmes are being prepared in 2008 for Bangladesh, Nepal etc. Africa is likely to continue consuming the bulk of the IfS’ crisis response budget, where the instrument appears to usefully complement notably the peace facility.III. THE CRISIS PREPAREDNESS COMPONENT OF THE STABILITY INSTRUMENT (ARTICLE 4.3, BUDGET HEADING 19.06.01)In addition to the above-described sizeable and growing crisis response component, the Instrument for Stability is innovating by introducing a ‘crisis preparedness’ component (€7 million in 2007, and a further €8 million in 2008). This Peace-building Partnership aims at mobilising and consolidating civilian expertise for peace-building activities. It will focus principally on strengthening directly the up-stream capacity of the relevant partners to rapidly respond to a crisis scenario, and will address, notably, civil society organisations, but also international organizations and relevant agencies in EU Member States. The work under the Peace-building Partnership is the subject of a fruitful on-going dialogue with the relevant sub-group of the European Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs.The first (2007) Annual Action Programme under the Peace-building Partnership will finance (to the tune of €7 million), inter alia : capacity-building and early warning activities and exchange of experience on best practice for civil society organizations; early warning and early recovery work with UNDP and the African Union; and training for civil stabilization missions (including the continuation of training of Member State experts for civilian crisis management by the European Group for Training – EGT). The financing decision was adopted in late 2007, and the first components are expected to materialise during the first half of 2008. A second (2008) Annual Action Programme for €8 million is currently being circulated for discussion by Member States.Moreover, the Peace-building Partnership will build upon existing work with relevant civil society organisations , which is currently being undertaken in the context of a preparatory action for the continuation of the earlier-established ‘Conflict Prevention Network’. This work has now been re-titled the 'Initiative for Peace-building'. Finally, a web-portal has been set up under the Partnership, to allow interested organisations to provide to the Commission, on a voluntary basis, information regarding their areas of activity related to conflict prevention, crisis management and peace-building. This information will initially serve as a directory in order to facilitate the enhancement of a policy dialogue with relevant organisations.IV. THE LONG-TERM PART OF THE STABILITY INSTRUMENT (ARTICLES 4.1 AND 4.2, BUDGET HEADINGS 19.06.02 AND 19.06.03)On the basis of the Strategy and the Indicative Programme for the years 2007-2008 the Annual Action Programme (AAP) 2007 was adopted in December 2007. The Annual Action programme focuses on the following actions:19.06.02.01 - ACTIONS IN THE AREA OF RISK MITIGATION AND PREPAREDNESS RELATING TO CHEMICAL, NUCLEAR AND BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS OR AGENTS1. Title: Support to the International Science and Technology Centre (ISTC) in Moscow and the Science and Technology Centre in Ukraine, Kiev (STCU).Amount: € 15 MDuration: yearly commitmentObjectives: to redirect activities of scientists and engineers possessing knowledge and skills related to WMD towards peaceful research activities.This activity is managed by DG RTD through crossed sub-delegation. The Centres have been evaluated by a team of independent experts and Commission services are conducting an assessment of Centres' future direction in cooperation with the Member States.2. Title: Knowledge Management System on CBRN TraffickingAmount: € 1 MDuration: 24 monthsObjectives: to improve capabilities of EU neighbouring countries in South-East Europe and possibly Caucasus to combat the illicit trafficking and criminal use of CBRN materials.The contract has been signed with the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI). It should provide a useful tool for information on trafficking incidents.3. Title: Combating illicit trafficking of nuclear and radioactive materials in FSU countries (Russian Federation, Ukraine, Armenia, the Republic of Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Belarus)Amount: € 5 MDuration: 48 monthsObjectives: to provide assistance to FSU countries in order to improve their technical and organisational measures for detection of nuclear and radioactive materials illicit trafficking.This project will be implemented by the EC Joint Research Centre and will provide specific locations with up-to-date technology for detection of illicit materials.4. Title: Assistance in export control of dual-use goodsAmount: € 5 MDuration: 30 monthsObjectives: to support the development of legal framework and institutional capacities for the establishment and enforcement of the effective export controls on dual-use items, including measures for regional cooperation.The project to be implemented by the German Federal Office of Economics and Export Control (BAFA) is a continuation and extension of previously funded activities to transfer to the partner countries the EU methodology for effective export control.19.06.03.01 - TRANS-REGIONAL ACTIONS IN THE AREAS OF ORGANISED CRIME, TRAFFICKING, PROTECTION OF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, THREATS TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM1. Title: Expert Support FacilityAmount: € 3.8 MDuration: This amount will cover the costs incurred for the establishment and for actions over a 48 months period.Objectives: To establish a flexible structure aiming at the establishment of reliable and efficient relations with beneficiaries. To this end, the ESF should be responsible for the support to trans-regional and/or multi-purpose projects and programmes at the programming and implementation levels in the areas of article 4 (1) and (2) IfS.The ESF will be implemented through EU MS organisations, including agencies, as well as through Commission in-house expertise, in particular drawn from the Joint Research Centre (JRC) in its areas of competence. An additional 2M€ will be committed in the framework of the AAP 2008.2. Title: Fight against trafficking from/to AfghanistanAmount: € 5.2 M in 2007Duration : 36 monthsObjectives: to counter trafficking from/to Afghanistan along the heroin route with a special emphasis on the western route. The specific objective is the development of trans-regional capacity to collect, analyze and share law enforcement data in the areas of border control and forensics for Economic Cooperation Organisation (ECO) members countries.The project is planned to be implemented through EU Member States, in collaboration with UNODC and Interpol. Following an informal call for expressions of interest sent in October 2007 to the 27 EU MS, 5 expressions of interest were received and an informal meeting was held in November 2007. An additional contribution of up to 4.3 M€ is envisaged under the AAP 2008.These programmes will start to be implemented in 2008. It is therefore too early to make an assessment of their effectiveness.AIDCO is also currently working on the preparation of the Annual Action Programme for 2008.IV.1 . Mine Action and the Instrument for StabilityAs far as landmines are concerned, it is worth recalling that the IfS is not meant to be an instrument replacing - legally or financially - the repealed Anti-Personnel Landmines (APL) thematic budget line. Main funds to support mine action should come from the geographic and development instruments (DCI, IPA, ENPI besides the EDF) or the humanitarian aid instrument in case of crisis situations.As for the IfS, support to mine action is foreseen only under its short-term remit (Article 3.h) and with some constraints. There are no provisions for possible APL support under the IfS long-term part (art. 4 - applicable to "stable conditions"). However, the latter does cover firearms and ammunition. From a stock-taking exercise carried out among relevant Commission services in terms of programming funds committed to mine action after the repeal of the APL budget line, it is evident that funds have dropped by one third, which was the ratio covered by the APL horizontal budget line vis-à-vis the geographic and development instruments (the remaining two thirds). Relex A is strengthening internal coordination within the Commission to ensure that APL are given proper attention and hence are effectively mainstreamed in national programs.ANNEXTABLE 1: OVERALL IFS ALLOCATIONS, COMMITMENTS AND PAYMENTS IN 2007 BETWEEN CRISIS RESPONSE / CRISIS PREPAREDNESS / LONGER-TERM THREATS (BUDGET HEADING 19.06)[pic]TABLE 2: IFS CRISIS RESPONSE AND PREPAREDNESS: COMMITMENTS AND PAYMENTS, BROKEN DOWN BY PROGRAMMES AND DECISIONS (BUDGET HEADING 19.06.01, ARTICLE 3 AND 4.3 OF THE IFS REGULATION)[pic]TABLE 3: IFS CRISIS RESPONSE: OVERVIEW BY SECTOR, COUNTRY AND REGION (BUDGET HEADING 19.06.01, ART. 3 OF THE IFS REGULATION)[pic]TABLE 4: IFS LONGER-TERM COMPONENT: COMMITMENTS AND PAYMENTS, BROKEN DOWN BY COUNTRY AND REGION AND BY COOPERATION SECTOR (BUDGET HEADINGS 19.06.02 AND 19.06.03, ART. 4 (1) AND (2) OF THE IFS REGULATION)[pic][1] The overall financial envelope for the Instrument for Stability for the period 2007-2013 is €2,062,000,000. Out of this amount, the regulation specifies that no more than respectively 7%, 15% and 5% shall be allocated to measures falling under Articles 4(1), 4(2) and 4(3). This leaves at least 73% or €1,505,260,000 of the total for measures falling under Article 3 or ‘crisis response’.[2] On 18 December 2007, the Presidents of the Europe湡䌠浯業獳潩Ɱ䔠牵灯慥⁮慐汲慩敭瑮愠摮䌠畯据汩漠⁦桴⁥畅潲数湡唠楮湯漠⁮敢慨晬漠⁦桴⁥㜲䔠⁕敍扭牥匠慴整⁳楳湧摥愠鄠畅潲数湡䌠湯敳獮獵漠⁮an Commission, European Parliament and Council of the European Union on behalf of the 27 EU Member States signed a ‘European Consensus on Humanitarian Aid’, outlining a common EU vision and practical approach to reach out efficiently to millions of people world-wide requiring basic life-saving aid. The Commission is currently preparing a 5-year action plan to implement the commitments made at EU level through the Consensus. The adoption and subsequent implementation of the action plan will further consolidate and develop the EU’s response to humanitarian crises.[3] The Community civil protection mechanism, deployable within and outside the EU through the mechanism’s Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC), was further reinforced during 2007, inter alia to allow the Commission to facilitate and in some cases co-finance (up to 50%) the transport of civil protection assistance to a disaster affected country.[4] Work is also underway to further improve the Commission’s crisis response capacities . In line with earlier recommendations of the Barnier report, the network of more than 130 Commission Delegations in third countries is being strengthened specifically as regards the coordination/ facilitation of crisis responses, with the objective of progressively building a number of regional poles of multi-sector expertise for crisis response. Work is also continuing on further reinforcing emergency aid coordination between humanitarian responses, civil protection, and other crisis responses, both at headquarters level and in the field.[5] The initial budgetary allocation of article 190601 was of €100 million, of which €7 million were set aside for ‘crisis preparedness’ (see hereunder), leaving €93 million for crisis response. The difference between this initially available allocation of €93 million and the final available allocation of €91 million is explained by the exceptional transfer of €2 million to the budget line 19.06.03 for longer-term IfS measures. The latter was made necessary in order to allow the Commission to adopt an unforeseen financing decision under the long-term component of the IfS to support the continuation of the on-going border management project in the Philippines under a more suitable legal basis than the ALA regulation, following a ruling by the ECJ.[6] The slightly lower than planned payment rate is explained by the fact that advance payments for several 2007 programmes were made in early 2008 after contract signature.