P9_TA(2024)0034 – Role of preventive diplomacy in tackling frozen conflicts around the world – missed opportunity or change for the future? – European Parliament recommendation of 17 January 2024 to the Council, Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the role of preventive diplomacy in tackling frozen conflicts around the world – missed opportunity or change for the future? (2023/2050(INI))
Date: 2024-01-17
Institutions: Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: conflict prevention, crisis management, diplomatic relations, international security, peacekeeping, settlement of disputes, the EU's international role








C_202405744EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/5744


17.10.2024






P9_TA(2024)0034

Role of preventive diplomacy in tackling frozen conflicts around the world – missed opportunity or change for the future?


European Parliament recommendation of 17 January 2024 to the Council, Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy on the role of preventive diplomacy in tackling frozen conflicts around the world – missed opportunity or change for the future? (2023/2050(INI))

(C/2024/5744)



The European Parliament,







—


having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,










—


having regard to the Council conclusions of 20 June 2011 on conflict prevention and of 22 January 2018 on the Integrated Approach to External Conflicts and Crises,










—


having regard to the Global Strategy for the European Union’s Foreign and Security Policy of 28 June 2016,










—


having regard to the Council conclusions and Concept on EU Peace Mediation of 7 December 2020,










—


having regard to the ‘Strategic Compass for Security and Defence — For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security’ action plan, which was approved by the Council on 21 March 2022 and endorsed by the European Council on 25 March 2022,










—


having regard to the joint staff working document from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 1 September 2023 entitled ‘Updated toolset for EU Conflict Analysis and Conflict Early Warning – Objectives, processes and guidance’ (SWD(2023)0295),










—


having regard to its recommendation of 10 February 1999 on the establishment of a European Civil Peace Corps (1),










—


having regard to the UN New Agenda for Peace of 20 July 2023,










—


having regard to UN Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security of 31 October 2000,










—


having regard to its resolution of 23 October 2020 on Gender Equality in EU’s foreign and security policy (2),










—


having regard to its resolution of 12 March 2019 on building EU capacity on conflict prevention and mediation (3),










—


having regard to its resolution of 18 April 2023 on the implementation of civilian CSDP and other EU civilian security assistance (4),










—


having regard to the Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on EU Climate Diplomacy of 6 October 2023,










—


having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2018 on Georgian occupied territories 10 years after the Russian invasion (5),










—


having regard to Rule 118 of its Rules of Procedure,










—


having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A9-0404/2023),










A.


whereas preserving peace, preventing conflicts and strengthening international security are among the key external action objectives of the EU as laid down in Article 21(2) of the Treaty on European Union;










B.


whereas a changing geopolitical context stemming from emerging powers confronting long-dominant actors, attacks on the multilateral system, democracy and the rules-based order, violence resurging in previously protracted conflicts, emerging technologies, cyber threats, malign third-party interference, the climate and biodiversity crises, unprecedented global levels of economic inequality, the reversal of rights, notably for women, the persistent and systematic exclusion of and discrimination against entire social groups, global backsliding on human rights and democracy, food security issues and migration are among the factors contributing to conflicts and instability around the world, especially considering Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine and the growing tensions in the Middle East;










C.


whereas the UN defines ‘preventive diplomacy’ as ‘diplomatic action taken to prevent disputes from escalating into conflicts and to limit the spread of conflicts when they occur’;










D.


whereas preventive diplomacy in the EU encompasses political and financial support for the multilateral system, trade, development, humanitarian assistance and human rights, focusing on identifying opportunities to address the causes of conflict and creating spaces for dialogue, often in partnership with international and regional organisations as well as concerned parties;










E.


whereas frozen conflicts fuel and normalise nationalist narratives and sentiments, and perpetuate the rise of the far right;










F.


whereas emerging powers are confronting traditional players and, together with new technologies and further globalisation, are leading to increased international competition, which, together with climate change, food security and migration, causes rising tensions and leads to conflicts across the world that are also challenging for the EU;










G.


whereas the multilateral, rules-based order is currently under threat and being challenged in the volatile geopolitical situation, which makes it imperative that the EU responds to international conflict situations in line with its proclaimed values of human rights, equality, freedom, democracy, the rule of law and human dignity, in order not to further weaken support for multilateralism; whereas some former alliances based on the common interest of disrupting this system are beginning to re-emerge, such as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS); whereas Russia’s unilateral actions have had a significant impact on the formation of alliances and the establishment of its spheres of influence;










H.


whereas it is urgent, in the interest and for the advancement of democracy, human rights and the rule of law, to uphold and defend multilateralism and a rules-based international order;










I.


whereas autocratic actors challenge the universality of human rights and undermine democratic standards worldwide; whereas a world of healthy democracies, understood as a world of strong democratic systems, is a safer world, as they have significant check and balances in place that prevent the unpredictability of autocracies;










J.


whereas the main conflicts come from state and non-state actors using hybrid strategies, cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and direct interference in elections and political processes, economic coercion and the instrumentalisation of irregular migration flows;










K.


whereas the EU needs to step up its preventive tools and acknowledge the vital role it plays in preserving peace, stability and security both within the EU and outside its borders;










L.


whereas the EU is the biggest international aid donor in the world, providing help to overcome poverty and advance global development; whereas it has not achieved the same impact in the public diplomacy sphere and should therefore improve its ambition and visibility in the area of preventive diplomacy around the world, primarily by communicating its achievements and success in its diplomatic activities undertaken so far, and in the outcomes of its financial support; whereas the EU is conducting a thorough evaluation of the instruments financing international cooperation;










M.


whereas the EU’s approach to preventive diplomacy is aimed at preserving peace, preventing conflicts and strengthening international security, involving multi-dimensional, multilevel and multi-actor actions, while, at the same time, addressing various aspects and stages of conflicts and facilitating spaces for dialogue;










N.


whereas the sole reliance on political, diplomatic or military strategies often proves to be inadequate for conflict prevention and, therefore, a comprehensive, ambitious, inclusive, gender-responsive conflict prevention and peacebuilding approach is needed, involving humanitarian aid, development cooperation, trade and foreign and security policies, restoration and maintenance of the internal legal order, the creation or re-creation of administrative structures, interethnic and inter-religious dialogue and other approaches to conflict settlement, including by fighting impunity; whereas the EU’s actions on preventive diplomacy must be primarily guided by an unwavering commitment to cooperation for democracy and development and trust-building measures between different parties;










O.


whereas the EU’s international development efforts and democracy support are key EU foreign policy tools; whereas election observation missions play an important role in enhancing the EU’s engagement with partner countries, including in supporting their efforts to fulfil their international human rights obligations;










P.


whereas, in accordance with the new European consensus on development, the EU and its Member States recognise the nexus between sustainable development, humanitarian action, peace and security in the pursuit of the objectives of the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular SDG 16 on promoting peaceful and inclusive societies;










Q.


whereas the Council has appointed nine EU special representatives for different unstable and conflict-affected regions, with some of them acting as mediators and peace facilitators to prevent disputes from escalating and to limit the spread of conflicts when they occur, but their initiatives and the effects of their actions are not always sufficiently visible or effective; whereas it is important that EU special representatives have a broad, flexible mandate, capable of adapting to evolving geopolitical circumstances in order to promote the EU’s policies and interests in specific regions and countries and to play an active role in preventive diplomacy efforts;










R.


whereas the EU does not have the necessary confidence, means, resources or tools to develop its full mediation potential in areas of strategic importance and might not be considered unbiased by one or more of the warring parties; whereas this could lead to a rise in anti-European narratives in the EU’s immediate neighbourhood and non-EU countries;










S.


whereas Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine, and against Georgia in August 2008, and its consequences around the world highlight the need for stronger and more ambitious, credible, strategic, tangible and unified EU action on the world stage, and accentuates the necessity of the EU autonomously setting its own strategic objectives and developing and using the capabilities needed to pursue them in order to avoid repeating prior mistakes and learning from them for future challenges; whereas the EU should commit all the necessary financial resources to tackle the rapidly increasing geopolitical challenges and invest more in preventive diplomacy and other conflict prevention measures to prevent conflicts from spreading, as they are detrimental to the social and economic development of the affected areas;










T.


whereas security in the Eastern neighbourhood and the Western Balkans, and the Sahel region, West Africa and the Horn of Africa is greatly threatened by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its hybrid malign actions, and the possibility of this aggression spilling over into neighbouring countries; whereas the destabilisation of our immediate neighbourhood threatens the stability, peace and security of the EU’s external borders and thus of the EU and its Member States; whereas the EU needs to increase the effectiveness of the EU’s security and defence policy, in particular in the Eastern Partnership countries;










U.


whereas the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine is a wake-up call for the EU, as it presents an immediate threat to the European and global security order and to the security of the EU and its Member States, as well as its candidate and potential candidate countries; whereas Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and its consequences around the world have galvanised the momentum towards achieving a geopolitical redefinition of the EU’s foreign policy, including a reconsideration of its response mechanisms, including its preventive diplomacy toolbox, as well as triggering public calls for the EU to act in a consistent manner in response to international conflicts;










V.


whereas the EU should actively pursue preventive diplomacy in regions of frozen conflict to prevent escalation and promote stabilisation;










W.


whereas the EU has always strived to facilitate direct talks and reduce the risk of escalation in different regions of the world, offering support for peace processes, peacebuilding initiatives and regional early warning systems in a complex geopolitical context;










X.


whereas the lack of will on the part of the Member States to step away from their individual, political or economic interests in external relations in order to build joint capacity together and fully develop strategic autonomy is one of the main obstacles to the EU’s global leadership in preventive diplomacy;










Y.


whereas the EU should continue moving forward towards fully developing its own autonomous and permanent instruments in its external action, common foreign and security policy (CFSP) and common security and defence policy (CSDP);










Z.


whereas civilian crisis management is a fundamental component of the CFSP;










AA.


whereas coordination between the European External Action Service (EEAS), Parliament and the Member States needs to be reassessed and strengthened in order to build joint capacities and modernise current approaches to deliver tangible results and launch meaningful initiatives in preventive diplomacy, peacebuilding and peacemaking; whereas the EU needs to speak with a single voice and its action on the ground should be aligned with that of its Member States, in terms of early warning, conflict prevention and crisis management; whereas conflict prevention is a common objective of all Member States;










AB.


whereas the EU’s credibility is a paramount requirement for the correct implementation of its preventive diplomacy actions as it reinforces trust towards the EU among the different actors involved in a conflict; whereas, in this regard, it is necessary to ensure the highest level of coordination and coherence in the EU’s external action, particularly by ensuring the leading role of the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy (VP / HR) as a bridge builder between the CFSP and EU external relations; whereas the Commission needs to strengthen its coordination with the EEAS, including in the EU’s preventive diplomacy initiatives and actions, by guaranteeing full compliance with Articles 3(2) and 9 of the EEAS Decision (6);










AC.


whereas global funding for conflict prevention and peacebuilding is at a 15-year record low (7);










AD.


whereas, within the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation (NDICI – Global Europe) instrument, there is a thematic programme on peace, stability and conflict prevention; whereas the Commission has published a multi-annual indicative programme that allocates EUR 870 970 044 for the 2021-2027 period to this thematic area, of which only 13 %-18 % will be allocated to conflict prevention;










AE.


whereas the EU’s civilian and military operations have a mandate for conflict prevention, peacekeeping and crisis management; whereas their preventive toolbox capacity should be expanded and additional staff training should be provided;










AF.


whereas, regretfully, the EU has demonstrated on different occasions a lack of clarity in its external representation, clearly affecting its coherence and, therefore, its credibility worldwide; whereas it is necessary to clearly define the competences of the VP / HR, the President of the Commission and the President of the European Council on the EU’s external action and representation, as the current regulatory framework is unclear concerning the competences of each institutional figure;










AG.


whereas research shows that women and men experience, engage in and are affected by violent armed conflict differently and have a different understanding of peace (8);










AH.


whereas the implementation of the Women, Peace and Security agenda represents an essential tool for confirming that a meaningful and equitable role in decision-making is secured for women of all ages during all stages of conflict prevention, peacemaking, peacebuilding and post-conflict rehabilitation; whereas, in the EU Strategic Compass, Women, Peace and Security forms an integral part of the document;










AI.


whereas emblematic and cultural heritage monuments in war-affected areas contribute to peacebuilding and reconciliation among communities;










AJ.


whereas supporting culture and clearly targeted resources for international cultural relations would greatly enhance the EU’s ability to fully develop and support its intercultural relations with partners as a valuable component of the preventive diplomacy toolbox;










AK.


whereas the EU’s cultural diplomacy and the protection of cultural and historical heritage are important for coexistence, peace, democracy and sustainable development by promoting solidarity, tolerance and reconciliation through its delegations and actors on the ground;










AL.


whereas the return of the US to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) is important for global cooperation on transnational challenges, including preventive diplomacy efforts;










AM.


whereas the growing Russia-China-Iran axis is instrumentalising international organisations, particularly the UN bodies, to erode international law and subjugate them to their interests, which increasingly contradicts the UN Charter and the rules-based global order;










AN.


whereas climate diplomacy frames climate change as an element of external action policy and highlights the need to integrate climate objectives and address climate risks at the highest diplomatic level and across all policy areas;










AO.


whereas cooperation with Member States, institutions, transatlantic and international partners, EU candidate countries and other countries through the exchange of tools, information and practices can play a key role in upgrading and improving the preventive diplomatic tools of the EU;










AP.


whereas the recent surge in tensions between Venezuela and Guyana over the Essequibo region is an opportunity for the international community, including the EU, to take urgent preventive diplomatic action before the matter escalates further;













1.


Recommends that the Council, the Commission and the VP / HR:






(a)


acknowledge the strong link between EU internal and external policy and security dimensions and reflect this in their approach to conflict prevention and resolution, and that preventive diplomacy should happen both within and outside of the EU; fully exploit the possibilities offered by the Lisbon Treaty to strengthen existing coordination mechanisms; acknowledge the need to end the narrow interpretation of security and to start the discussion from a concept that does not neglect factors such as environmental hazards, threat of diseases, hunger, social injustice, disinformation and violence;










(b)


place the respect for fundamental, constitutional and human rights, and the safeguarding of civil liberties at the core of internal and external security policy and its preventive diplomacy efforts, as the EU’s ability to act as a global foreign policy player, a reliable international partner, honest broker and a credible security and defence actor rests on its ability to promote these values, while also proactively defining, asserting and defending its European interests in the world;










(c)


adapt and regularly update the EU’s conflict prevention and resolution tools to the changing nature of conflicts, including as a result of climate change and consequent disasters, geopolitical instability, environmental hazards, threat of diseases, hunger, social injustice, the rise of new technologies, the global race for raw materials, rising inequalities around the world and food scarcity, while continuously assessing emerging global challenges and effectively promoting peace, stability and security;










(d)


enhance their role and meaningful involvement in the processes of conflict prevention and resolution, as well as mediation of the implementation of the EU-brokered ceasefire agreements so as to ensure the efficient functioning of the instruments applied by the EU and to facilitate the tangible progress;










(e)


fully use the means at their disposal to prevent conflict, align the EU’s prevention and conflict resolution, further develop the tools in line with its geopolitical agenda and EU values and act as guarantor of the implementation of the EU-mediated ceasefire agreements and an equidistant and values-based mediator during crises and conflict around the world, in view of the fact that the EU is known for its legitimacy, credibility, impartiality and inclusivity; ensure respect for the sovereignty of countries in any act of preventive diplomacy; recall that the EU should play a major diplomatic role in order to put an end to the conflicts around the world;










(f)


integrate the EU’s preventive diplomacy tools into structural prevention mechanisms and actions, such as, for instance, political agreements among different actors involved in conflicts, national dialogues for reconciliation, peacebuilding and transitional justice, as well as truth and reconciliation commissions;










(g)


integrate cultural heritage into the EU’s overall approach to crisis management, as a cross cutting component of all actions within the EU toolbox for conflicts and crises;










(h)


call on the Member States to set aside individual interests in external relations and build joint capacity together in conflict prevention and mediation;










(i)


develop a set of clear and practical rules on the EU’s external action and representation by the VP / HR, the President of the Commission and the President of the European Council and ensure the consistency of their mandates; improve the EU’s mediation capacities by promoting political and fact-finding missions, inquiries and investigations;










(j)


ensure effective complementarity and a harmonised approach with Parliament and collaborate closely with Parliament’s preventive diplomacy actions, as parliamentary diplomacy and Parliament’s activities in this regard, such as its official missions to non-EU countries and to multilateral forums, contribute to the promotion of human rights, democratic standards and political pluralism worldwide, as well as conflict prevention and peacebuilding; present to Parliament annual assessments on the EU’s activities concerning preventive diplomacy worldwide, as well as reviews of the EU’s conflict Early Warning System when appropriate;






Understanding the local and cultural context








(k)


improve the EU’s understanding of local, historical, political, geographical, religious, environmental, minority rights, social and cultural contexts and invest in cultivating the necessary skills among EEAS staff working on and for conflict prevention and resolution, as well as mediation and the implementation of ceasefire agreements and to develop guidance in this regard; improve the understanding and address the root causes of conflict in order to prevent conflict from arising and spreading;










(l)


diversify the EU and its Member States’ diplomatic corps to ensure that demographic diversity and the inclusion of minorities benefit the diplomatic process from both empirical and normative perspectives;










(m)


tailor state-building assistance to the cultural, historical, local, socio-economic, environmental and political context of the relevant country receiving it and continuously update it in response to conditions on the ground through rigorous and detailed political analysis for a common strategic response; foster open communication and consultation with local stakeholders and all parts of society in the relevant country, in particular civil society organisations and non-governmental organisations, to better understand the local and cultural context, build confidence, encourage people-to-people relations and gather early warning information in affected areas;










(n)


call on the European Council and the EEAS to further enhance the EU’s visibility in other non-EU and partner countries and strengthen the EU’s cultural diplomacy and international cultural relations dimension and activities as a relevant instrument for peace, peacebuilding and conflict prevention, as well as for addressing global challenges, and to demonstrate the EU’s added value and advance cooperation and relations with these countries and international partners; use and expand the cultural heritage protection component in conflicts and crises as a factor contributing to the development of peace, reconciliation and mutual understanding, and intercultural dialogue in conflict and post-conflict areas; increase the EU’s support to the creative and artistic sectors of non-EU countries, including assistance on capacity building; promote cultural co-creation between non-EU countries, including by fostering cultural exchanges and residences;










(o)


strengthen the gender-responsive approach in its preventive diplomacy activities, with a view to better protecting women’s and girls’ rights and increasing their participation in such activities; ensure gender equality among special representatives and special envoys in line with the policy framework on gender equality, notably the Gender Action Plan III and the EU Gender Equality Strategy 2020-2025; effectively implement the EU Strategic Approach to Women, Peace and Security and the Gender Action Plan in order to achieve sustainable and lasting peace and security;










(p)


develop and integrate gender-responsive conflict analysis that is sensitive to the local context and recognises the gendered drivers and gendered impact of conflict, into all planning assumptions in order to strengthen preventive efforts and mitigate risks of relapse to conflict;










(q)


include women’s participation and gender-responsive indicators in all early warning processes, conflict prevention and early response efforts;










(r)


use the full potential of ‘education diplomacy’ as a fundamental instrument within preventive diplomacy, particularly the EU’s Erasmus + programme; develop educational activities within this framework with non-EU countries, including through Erasmus+; promote the adoption in non-EU countries of student exchanges and student visits to sites of historical memory with the aim of promoting intercultural dialogue;










(s)


keep track of regional fragmentation and draft regional conflict analyses, with the aim of assessing and preventing transnational threats and interstate tensions, as well as existing or potential spillovers;










EU conflict Early Warning System








(t)


ensure that the EU’s conflict Early Warning System is sufficiently proactive, provided with the necessary resources and based on forward-looking, comprehensive and robust analysis of risk factors that frequently correlate with the outburst of violence, as well as management tools that identify, assess and help to prioritise situations at risk of violent conflict;










(u)


closely and systematically involve the EU delegations in countries and regions at risk of conflict or dealing with frozen and unresolved conflicts in monitoring the situation on the ground and regularly contributing to the EU conflict Early Warning System; advocate for full and unimpeded humanitarian access and respect for international law when exercising preventive diplomacy in frozen conflicts;










(v)


assess the results achieved by the EU conflict Early Warning System and propose adjustments to make it more effective so that it can identify structural risk factors and enable policymakers to develop timely strategic responses to mitigate risks and identify opportunities for conflict prevention;










(w)


ensure that this mechanism collaborates closely with the EU Intelligence and Situation Centre (INTCEN), the EEAS Crisis Response Centre and the Satellite Centre owing to the need for a pertinent flow of information in this regard; strengthen the EU INTCEN and the EEAS Crisis Response Centre by increasing their staff, financial resources and capabilities;










(x)


establish close cooperation with relevant UN offices and agencies and other international actors, most notably NATO, on the ground to pool information in the context of early warning efforts;










(y)


constantly improve the security protocols of the services working on intelligence and/or with sensible information;






Role of special representatives and special envoys in preventive diplomacy, their accountability and overview of their results in conflict resolution processes








(z)


consider local, cultural and historical backgrounds when appointing special representatives and envoys in order to avoid sparking controversy in conflict regions should the appointment come from a Member State with historical ties to the region concerned that could threaten their perception as honest broker; take into account the crucial importance of these representatives being properly familiarised with and trained in the area they will assess;










(aa)


thoroughly assess, including scrutiny in Parliament, the initiatives undertaken by EU special representatives and envoys, as well as their results and how they are contributing to preventive diplomacy, conflict resolution processes or the implementation of EU-brokered ceasefire agreements, where relevant;










(ab)


provide regular and thorough assessments on the accountability of the EU special representatives and envoys pursuant to their mandates, and an overview of the initiatives they have undertaken and the results they have achieved in the conflict resolution processes, as well as mediation of the implementation of the EU-brokered ceasefire agreements;










(ac)


improve the transparency and parliamentary scrutiny of the work of the EU special representatives and envoys by providing Parliament with regular and detailed reports on their activities and achievements pursuant to their mandates; promote closer relations between EU special representatives and envoys and Parliament in the light of the inter-parliamentary diplomatic efforts;










(ad)


ensure that the appointment of EU special representatives, special envoys and ambassadors can only be confirmed after a positive assessment by Parliament’s Committee on Foreign Affairs;






Lessons learnt from EU-mediated conflict resolution and frozen conflicts and EU-brokered ceasefire agreements, as well as frozen and unresolved conflicts








(ae)


conduct a study into the lessons learnt from the EU’s prior actions, missed opportunities for preventive diplomacy and its achievements in the process of peaceful conflict resolution, for example, in the Sahel region, West Africa and the Horn of Africa, the Western Balkans, South Caucasus, Cyprus, Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, the Middle East, Moldova and Ukraine;










(af)


prevent, in the future, the possible negative consequences of the premature suspension of EU missions in conflict regions, as well the continuation of highly ineffective missions or those that have the potential to have negative political and security effects;










(ag)


expand the preventive diplomacy toolbox of the EU’s civilian and military missions and operations, as well as their capacity and staff training in order to anticipate and react more quickly to developing situations on the ground;










(ah)


ensure that the EU assumes a more active role in supporting all stages of the UN-led process on the Cyprus problem, with all appropriate means at its disposal, including through the appointment of an EU envoy, with a view to reaching a comprehensive settlement of the Cyprus problem, within the UN framework, in accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions and in line with the principles on which the EU is founded and the acquis;










(ai)


draw on the lessons learnt from the lack of progress in the implementation of the EU-brokered ceasefire agreements, including the EU-mediated 12 August 2008 Ceasefire Agreement between Russia and Georgia;










(aj)


stress the need for the EU to play an active role wherever there are breaches of international humanitarian law;










(ak)


ensure a coordinated approach between the EU and its Member States in conflict prevention and peacebuilding, as opposed to what occurred in Afghanistan where they were working in parallel in different regions;










(al)


enhance the EU’s ability to rigorously and continuously analyse and predict the political and security situation in crisis regions and adapt the EU’s response to shifting realities on the ground, including by ensuring there is a responsible focal point for conflict analysis in every EU delegation; ensure complementarity between efforts on the ground and diplomatic efforts between governments, representatives and other relevant actors at state level;










(am)


assess what has been lacking in the EU’s preventive diplomacy efforts in Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to avert the tensions owing to inflammatory rhetoric and secessionist acts that undermine its European aspirations; urge Bosnia and Herzegovina to urgently find a common political agreement in order to comply with the Commission’s recommendation of 8 November 2023 and to be able to open accession negotiations before March 2024, also taking into account the volatile geopolitical situation and efforts to prevent external malign influences in the region, thus paving the way for permanent peace and stability in the country and region; welcome the European Council’s decision of 14-15 December 2023 to open accession negotiations with Bosnia and Herzegovina upon its compliance with the EU membership criteria; eagerly await eagerly the Commission’s report on progress and expects it by no later than March 2024;










(an)


expand the mission EUFOR Althea in Bosnia and Herzegovina and strengthen its conflict prevention toolbox; note that it is the most successful EU peacekeeping and peacebuilding mission to date that has maintained stability in the region and contributed to a safe and secure environment in the country;










(ao)


set up a mechanism to verify and ensure the implementation of all agreements reached between Serbia and Kosovo so far, and to report to Parliament periodically in order to ensure that further tensions are averted and to provide more effective mediation and facilitation efforts between the parties, including by allocating more resources to the EU-facilitated Belgrade-Pristina dialogue and making the dialogue process more citizen-oriented, with the goal of overcoming the current stalemate;










(ap)


aim to come up with lessons learnt from the failed preventive diplomacy efforts between Armenia and Azerbaijan that resulted in Azerbaijan’s military operation in Nagorno-Karabakh and situations similar to the one during and after the 2020 war when, after the OSCE international dialogue framework had failed, the EU’s passive stance was insufficient to prevent the return to violent conflict and left the EU less impactful than other regional actors, such as Russia, Iran and Türkiye, who also continue to exert their influence and diminish that of the EU in the region and prevent the spillover effect in Armenia; respond to the instability in the wider South Caucasus region and strengthen the EU’s diplomatic efforts in the context of the Geneva International Discussions and otherwise, with the aim of ensuring that Russia fulfils its obligations under the EU-brokered ceasefire agreement of 12 August 2008, in particular to withdraw its occupying forces from the Georgian regions of Abkhazia and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia;










(aq)


address the root causes of the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which was further exacerbated by the despicable terrorist attack by Hamas against Israel on 7 October 2023, leading to a counter-attack by Israel, which have both led to thousands of casualties on both sides and the immense suffering of innocent civilians; intensify efforts, in coordination with its partners in the region and the international community, for the negotiated two-state solution in the internationally shared understanding that this offers the best chance for a viable peace settlement, with the aim of ending the recurring violence and enabling people on the Israeli and Palestinian sides to live in security, freedom, dignity and with equal rights; ensure that the EU is seen as mediator and honest broker, upholding international law in order to have a more effective role in the international arena;










(ar)


promote the EU’s participation in mediation, peacebuilding and conflict resolution such as in Colombia’s peace process, where the Union’s support focused on addressing the root causes of the conflict, including inequalities and human rights violations, through reconciliation efforts, economic territorial development through rural integration and multilevel political dialogue;










(as)


prioritise quiet diplomacy as the tool of choice when undertaking prevention initiatives, overcome the early warning-early action gap, increase the effectiveness of cooperation with other international partners and improve intra-EU coordination, including on civil-military matters and increase local ownership of EU initiatives;










(at)


draw from the EU’s experience and non-EU countries’ best practices on cross-border cooperation as a highly useful instrument for sustainable peacebuilding and conflict resolution between neighbours, especially after the stabilisation of conflicts;










(au)


develop an EU agenda/compact/guidelines for peace and diplomacy under the auspices of the VP / HR;










(av)


designate Peace and Conflict Advisors who will coordinate the work of the political, press and information and cooperation sections of the delegations;










(aw)


create a Council working party on prevention and mediation to discuss the prioritisation of opportunities for preventive engagement, as well as resulting analysis, follow-up and monitoring;










(ax)


propose an institutional upgrade through a new Peace and Prevention Hub that acts as a single-entry point for matters of prevention within the EEAS, enhanced regional cooperation and increased capacity to engage on topics of conflict, peace, prevention and diplomacy;






Strengthening partnerships and international coordination








(ay)


strengthen partnerships and coordination on preventive diplomacy with international, regional and sub-regional actors, such as the UN, the OSCE and its Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, NATO, the African Union and its regional components, African regional organisations (such as ECOWAS), the Organization of American States and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations; notes that a closer partnership with the UN and its bodies, notably the Peacebuilding Commission, can lead to strengthened coordination in conflict prevention globally;










(az)


ensure a coordinated, dynamic and multilateral approach to early warning, conflict prevention and mediation between the EU and other international organisations, such as the UN, the Peacebuilding Commission, the Council of Europe, OECD and the OSCE; ensure that EU delegations continuously liaise with UN field mechanisms such as the UN Resident Coordinator on the ground when pertinent;










(ba)


use diplomatic means and cooperate with multilateral platforms for peace to strengthen and consolidate anticipatory relationships before conflicts arise, especially the UN’s Peacebuilding Commission and the Department of Political and Peacebuilding Affairs, OECD’s International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding and the OSCE’s Conflict Prevention Centre;










(bb)


reiterate that the EU-UN partnership should use existing resolutions and lessons learnt for conflict prevention and work together to create new policies through regular consultations and exchanges of practices; emphasise the vital role that this coordination can play for conflict prevention strategies;










(bc)


welcome the UN’s New Agenda for Peace and the Peacebuilding Commission’s role and actions in human rights protection and peacebuilding efforts; propose to coordinate national conflict prevention strategies with the EEAS and their presentation on the Peacebuilding Commission’s agenda as well as stronger collaboration with the UN; note that these exchanges and better partnership with international and regional financial institutions could contribute significantly to conflict prevention in the areas of EU interest, as well as through smaller preventive missions that could assess instabilities after civilian missions withdraw from conflict-affected countries or countries with a potential risk of conflict, with a mission to remove factors that threaten security and safety;










(bd)


ensure that the EU is the single largest contributor to the UN system and takes leading positions at the UN in proportion to the size of its contributions to the organisation, which cover 30 % of its costs and 33 % of the expenses for UN peacekeeping missions;










(be)


use the EU’s representation at the UN headquarters in New York, Vienna, Geneva and Nairobi to actively engage with other UN member states to promote and protect the diplomatic rules-based international order founded on the UN Charter, along with a well-functioning, reformed multilateral system with an inclusive and effective UN at its core;










(bf)


pursue structured information exchanges, joint horizon scanning, strategic foresight and gender-responsive conflict analyses to ensure alignment between the EU and its partners within and outside of the EU; note that these actions could potentially bring the EU closer to becoming a leading actor in conflict prevention and resolution around the world;










(bg)


acknowledge the importance of faith-based organisations as players in conflict resolution and mediation, which makes them partners for preventive diplomacy; condemn, in this context, attacks on faith-based actors, in particular the imprisonment of bishops and priests in Nicaragua, including Sakharov Prize finalist Monsignor Rolando Álvarez;










(bh)


recognise the role of relevant regional organisations, stakeholders in Member States, like-minded partners and other involved actors including civil society and other non-governmental actors as key players in effective prevention and mediation and resolution, including women and youth, and as peace actors by using their historical relationships and individuals of distinguished record to mitigate the possible crises;










(bi)


actively and inclusively engage young people in efforts and cooperation to prevent conflicts and maintain peace, and implement the EU Youth Action Plan in EU external action, which supports the implementation of the UN Youth, Peace and Security Agenda;










(bj)


guarantee that EU delegations operate with a focal point on conflict prevention and peacebuilding; ensure that EU delegations, and particularly the abovementioned focal points, provide constant ground information to the EU conflict Early Warning System, the EU INTCEN and the EEAS Crisis Response Centre;










(bk)


step up efforts in fighting disinformation, misinformation and foreign interference operations from malicious actors seeking to foment conflicts and polarise communities, which can lead to the destabilisation of entire regions; reinforce cooperation with like-minded partners, such as NATO, on countering disinformation, hybrid threats and foreign interference coming from non-EU countries, which represents an essential part of preventive diplomacy;






Preventive diplomacy and vulnerable or at-risk groups








(bl)


recognise the specific vulnerabilities in conflict situations of at-risk groups including women, children, people with disabilities, people in jail – in particular political prisoners – human rights defenders, journalists and LGBTI people;










(bm)


ensure that the EU’s preventive diplomatic efforts are sufficiently sensitised to these vulnerabilities and address the particular concerns and needs of at-risk groups;










(bn)


recognise the specific vulnerabilities in conflict situations faced by non-governmental organisations on the ground, especially the ones working with at-risk populations and on sexual and reproductive rights;






Enhancing the EU's preventive diplomacy toolbox








(bo)


enhance the EU’s capacity to act in situations where there are no like-minded partners in order to increase its standing and geopolitical leverage in conflict prevention and resolution, and strengthen the EU’s role as a more proactive and resilient actor in the international order;










(bp)


strengthen the Peace, Stability and Conflict Prevention thematic programme of the NDICI – Global Europe instrument to enable the EU to better fund actions to promote peace, stability and conflict prevention; increase the funds available for conflict prevention under the NDICI – Global Europe thematic programme for the period until 2027, and increase the relevant administrative capacities (ISP.2) as this would reflect the profound changes to the security environment, in particular, since February 2022; swiftly implement the humanitarian-development-peace nexus (‘triple nexus’) approach in order to support conflict prevention efforts and strengthen the resilience of communities in areas affected by frozen conflicts that have varying levels of fragility, insecurity and poverty;










(bq)


recall that conflict prevention cannot be instrumentalised for security and geopolitical purposes, thus risking counterproductive peace and security repercussions in the long-term;










(br)


strengthen the EU’s ability to speak with one voice and to act as a truly global player in response to crises by implementing the necessary reforms to the decision-making processes;










(bs)


recognise the role of EU climate diplomacy in achieving the EU’s ambition for preventive diplomacy; invest more in supporting communities globally that are on the front lines of the climate emergency, and prepare for the now unavoidable increase in extreme weather events in order to mitigate the consequent increase in the preconditions for conflict and violence; address the role of climate-related resource scarcity and natural disaster response in exacerbating conflict, and provide inclusive solutions to climate and resource-related insecurity; use the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28), and in particular the inclusion of ‘Peace’ as a theme for the first time this year, as an opportunity to lead the international community in integrating and aligning diplomacy for peace and the climate;










(bt)


work towards ensuring that the EU takes up a prominent leadership position in peacekeeping operations, peacemaking and mediation, conflict prevention and the strengthening of international security around the world by fostering more resilient and enduring connections with other countries through its instruments and mechanisms, such as the Global Gateway;










(bu)


recall that greater focus on protecting and preserving cultural heritage after conflicts and crises can help to protect identities, develop mutual understanding and create foundations for sustainable recovery, reconciliation and lasting peace in post-conflict environments; note that these practices can lay the foundations for successful preventive diplomacy actions;










(bv)


engage with the Commission, the Council and Parliament with the aim of strengthening the financial and staff resources of the EEAS, both at its headquarters and EU delegations, in order to enable the service to reinforce its preventive diplomacy capabilities, among other things, and to be better prepared to tackle current and emerging global challenges and conflicts;










(bw)


deploy the Jean Monnet Dialogue, the Inter-parliamentary Dialogue and the Parliamentary Dialogue Process, which can contribute to building democratic parliamentary culture and preventing conflict in the accession countries, especially in the de-escalation of Serbia-Kosovo relations;










(bx)


insist on the budgetary increase for CFSP actions and other appropriate conflict and crisis response instruments in order to fully match the EU’s activities and capabilities with current challenges and conflicts worldwide;










(by)


develop a comprehensive EU strategy for preventive diplomacy that includes long-term commitment actions and initiatives for non-EU countries in conflicts; foster the development of multi-tier governance structures for non-EU countries in conflict, as well as their integration within regional organisations and structures, contributing to the removal of triggers of violence or escalation of conflict and to their sustainable resolution; take stock, in this regard, of best practices worldwide and support domestic prevention actors and mechanisms by providing the necessary political, technical and financial support;










(bz)


strengthen and update the EU’s 2018 Integrated Approach to External Conflicts and Crises with special attention to conflict prevention and resolution that combines human rights promotion and protection, humanitarian, development, peacebuilding and security assistance, sanctions and diplomatic engagement, fully addressing all aspects of the conflict, including in partnership with local and international partners;










(ca)


stress the need to establish a European Civil Peace Corps that brings together the expertise of institutional and non-institutional actors on conflict prevention, peaceful conflict resolution and reconciliation, with a view to making EU civilian crisis management more credible, coherent, effective, flexible and visible;










(cb)


consider the use, notwithstanding the political dimension and solutions to conflicts, of litigation through an international court or tribunal, such as the International Criminal Court or the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, as a method of preventive diplomacy;










(cc)


step up its public diplomacy and visibility efforts and communication campaigns in order to ensure that the EU is seen as a global peace actor and a key stakeholder in preventive diplomacy and peacebuilding, including the prevention of conflicts dimension of its missions and operations, and that its actions and success stories are not undermined by false narratives spread or claimed by other global actors present in conflict regions; allocate the necessary resources to the EEAS, and particularly the Strategic Communication and Foresight division of the EEAS and EU delegations to ensure the inclusivity and coherence of their cooperation activities with partner countries;










(cd)


continue to professionalise preventive diplomacy by ensuring that it is part of the training programme of the permanent structure of Parliament’s pilot project on the creation of the European Diplomatic Academy;










(ce)


build on existing well-functioning cooperation mechanisms in the EU, such as the Civil Protection Mechanism and CSDP missions and operations, in order to make use of the Member States’ expertise and avoid the duplication of efforts and resources; believe that the Member States should be more involved in the identification of prevention priorities and options for action, which should lead to improved sharing and coordination among them;
°
° °












2.


Instructs its President to forward this recommendation to the Council, the Commission and the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.






(1)  
            OJ C 150, 28.5.1999, p. 164.

(2)  
            OJ C 404, 6.10.2021, p. 202.

(3)  
            OJ C 23, 21.1.2021, p. 16.

(4)  Texts adopted, P9_TA(2023)0106.

(5)  
            OJ C 28, 27.1.2020, p. 97.

(6)  Council Decision 2010/427/EU of 26 July 2010 establishing the organisation and functioning of the European External Action Service, OJ L 201, 3.8.2010, p. 30.

(7)  OECD Development Assistance Committee, ‘Peace and Official Development Assistance’, October 2023.

(8)  Humanitarian Law & Policy, ‘Gendered impacts of armed conflict and implications for the application of IHL’, 30 June 2022.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/5744/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)