22-05-2025
UN Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin a crucial call for reform amid global uncertainties
Despite significant headwinds, a recent UN Ministerial meeting reflected broad backing for reformed peacekeeping.
With the future of multilateralism hanging in the balance, the United Nations (UN) used this month's Peacekeeping Ministerial in Berlin to mobilise political support for peacekeeping while reinforcing the need for deep systemic reform.
The meeting was attended by representatives from about 130 UN member states — 60 at ministerial level. Seventy-four countries pledged financial and other support to strengthen military and police units and other peacekeeping capabilities.
Compared with past events, Berlin saw a substantial increase in participating countries and pledges made. At the 2023 Ministerial in Ghana, 91 member states participated, with 33 pledging contributions.
While this year's pledges will help make UN peacekeeping more effective, their main importance is symbolic — confirming high-level political support for peacekeeping. Member states' broad backing for UN peacekeeping in the context of rising global threats sent a strong signal that peacekeeping is still relevant.
Since 2016, the Peacekeeping Ministerial has been held roughly every two years. UN member states typically use the opportunity to commit to enhancing peacekeeping and the safety of mission personnel.
This year's gathering attracted considerable public and media attention. Analysts characterised the mood at the UN as turning from bleak to catastrophic — mainly due to insecurity caused by a lack of political consensus and immense financial challenges for multilateral crisis management.
Some of the UN's peacekeeping missions such as those in Sudan, Mali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Lebanon have struggled to end conflicts and address the shifting demands of host nations and local populations. Support for missions from the UN Security Council (UNSC), host nations and regional actors has also been inconsistent, making operations difficult.
The most recent United States (US) plan to reduce funding, if not entirely defund, peacekeeping exacerbates the UN's pre-existing funding crunch. This challenge stems from an overreliance on US funding, although delayed disbursements and accumulated arrears also play a role.
While several conflict situations warranted deployments, notably in Sudan, the UN Security Council has not authorised a new peacekeeping mission since 2014. According to a recent report from the Center for International Peace Operations, the number of UN peacekeeping personnel worldwide had dropped to 67,715 in 2024, compared with its peak of 111,900 in 2015. The UN currently has 11 active peacekeeping missions, three fewer than in 2015.
Demonstrating political support is critical, considering the uncertainties about the UN's future role in addressing conflicts. US President Donald Trump's second term ushered in an era of ambivalent US engagement in peacekeeping. The country has been signalling that it may not fund UN peacekeeping, but 'at the same time, US officials have pushed for reform', points out Daniel Forti, Senior UN Analyst for the International Crisis Group.
Forti told ISS Today that US officials emphasise 'longstanding priorities for peacekeeping reform, such as performance, efficiency, and accountability, while their diplomats at the UN partake in discussions about mission mandate renewals and budget negotiations'.
Washington's dissonance on the issue was evident in Berlin.
'The US did not issue any pledges at the Berlin summit,' Forti said. 'This was an unusual, but perhaps not unexpected, decision.'
He said the US, which 'convened the original Leaders' Summit on Peacekeeping in 2014 and is still one of the co-chairs of the current Ministerial format, has made pledges at all previous conferences (including two convened during Trump's first term)'. But now, 'parts of the current administration appear to dismiss UN peacekeeping in its entirety'.
Besides making the political case for peacekeeping, the Berlin meeting reinforced that reform is vital. This has been an ongoing theme in discussions on addressing peacekeeping's political, operational and financial challenges. The 2024 Pact for the Future reinforced the need for reform, and member states have requested a review of all forms of UN peace operations.
A recent Global Alliance for Peace Operations report underlines that member states and partners should seize this moment to reform peacekeeping without losing the essential features that ensured its past effectiveness.
Germany's Foreign Affairs Minister Johann Wadephul affirmed this at the Ministerial, saying peacekeeping should 'adapt to a changing international environment'. He said several changes should be considered, including realistic and flexible mandates, a modular approach, clear transition and exit strategies, local ownership and the implications of diminishing resources.
As UN Secretary-General António Guterres underlined, all these suggestions must be buttressed by political support as 'Peace operations cannot succeed (without) a political solution.' This includes investments in securing peace processes and agreements, and using existing conflict prevention and mediation mechanisms.
The outcomes of the Ministerial will feed into the review of UN peace operations planned for 2025 and 2026. However, the main challenge is converting broad political support for peacekeeping into tangible diplomatic actions and policies. As International Crisis Group head Comfort Ero recently wrote, it is unclear whether member states have 'figured out how the UN can adapt its peacekeeping and peacemaking efforts to address today's unsettled political and security environment'.
These challenges must be taken up in the Security Council, where firm commitments from member states to implement reform are needed. Expanding the debate to other platforms, such as the UN General Assembly, would coalesce support, especially around political solutions as part of peacekeeping. Ultimately, the reform of peace operations requires a broad coalition involving UN member states, regional actors and civil society. DM
