Global Peace Operations Review, Center on International Cooperation (CIC)
A Background to the Report of the High-Level Panel on Peace Operations
By Jean Arnault
August 6, 2015
The HIPPO-report can better be understood by placing it within its historical context, and comparing it to the previous attempts to review peace operations, the Agenda for Peace (1992) and the Brahimi report (2000). The three reports present different perspectives on three key issues: the use of force and the principles of peacekeeping, peacebuilding, and the challenge of having no peace to keep. While the issues covered in the Brahimi and HIPPO-reports are “strikingly similar”, the more cautious approach considered in the 1992-report serves to a larger extent as a frame of reference: Robust mandates are in some cases necessary, but must be treated with care. The importance of accommodating the centrality of negotiated political solutions to internal conflicts is the key concern of the HIPPO-report, both to strategic and practical reasons: A new multi-actors response is needed as UN peacekeeping cannot be a substitute to the creation of a “global-regional peace and security framework”.